Is it time to switch film to MF?

[denniswms]

<p>I've worked almost exclusively on Pentax 67s for a quarter century and continue to be very satisfied with the results. The weight and manual aspects have never been an impediment and I've got wooden handles on the bodies and hoods on all the lenses and I rarely work with a tripod. I think the Pentax 67s are far more comfortable to shoot all afternoon than the Mamiya RB/RZ 67s. I used the RB for 3 months in the field and generated beautiful images before deciding to commit to the Pentax system. The Pentax just fits perfectly in my hands and I love the viewfinder with the matte screen.</p>

[jens_g.r._benthien]

<p>I second the choice of the Fuji rangefinders. I've both of them, the GW 690 III with the EBC Fujinon 3.5/90mm and the GSW 690 III with the EBC Fujinon 5.6/65mm. Incredible lenses with a resolution second to none. The GSW is comparable to a 28mm lens on a 35mm system, the GW to a 40mm on a 35mm system.</p>

<p>Don't be mislead by people who say the Fujis are made of plastic - they are not. Rock solid metal bodies with some sort of rubberized coating for better handling.</p>

<p><img src="http://toyotadesigner.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/gw_transparent02.jpg?w=300&h=200" alt="" width="300" height="200" /></p>

<p>If you shoot land or cityscapes you'll appreciate the built-in bubble level right on top of the viewfinder. The Fujis are extremely reliable in almost any weather condition, they just work from -45° C to +50° C, humid or dry areas. Robust as a brick. Best of all: no electronic, no battery. Very appealing are the aperture and exposure rings: they are close together, that means once you have set your f-stop/exposure you can modify the setting by turning both of them with one hand to play with depth of field.</p>

<p>Needless to mention that they are tack sharp because of their long rangefinder base. No distortion with the wide angle version. The new models are still serviced from Fuji (at least in Europe).</p>

<p>More information <strong><a href="http://toyotadesigner.wordpress.com/category/photography/6x9-and-large-format/">here</a></strong> - just scroll down a bit. Sorry that the article about the Fujis is only in German.</p>

<p>The Plaubel 69W ProShift Superwide on that page is a bit wider, but the handling is totally different.</p>

<p>6x9 is addictive. Put the slides onto a light table, grab a 8x loupe and you'll know why.</p>

<p>If your goal is an investment into a Nikon Coolscan 8000 or 9000 you'll have a perfect set up for really large prints.</p>

<p>Just a side note: Currently I don't have the intention to part with any of these magnificent beasts (because nobody would pay for their real value) ;-)</p>

<p> </p>

[jennifer_spencer]

<p>I have Fuji lenses for my 4x5 and they are very good. People forget about Fuji sometimes when they are not talking about film. I've been happy with my Fuji lenses. </p>

[f_ph1]

<p>I agree. The Fuji large format lenses give up nothing in terms of sharpness and overall quality to any other lens maker, including Schneider and Rodenstock.</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>My only concern with RF cameras is the inability to use graduate filters.</p>

[leo_papandreou1]

<p>Also, the fujis are fixed-lens only. At least the later models are.</p>

<p>Ray there's a guy on ebay selling brand new pro sd kits (camera, finder, back, lens) for around $600. I bought one. At that price used isnt very compelling. My first impression is, it's bulky. Tall, long, wide, with knobs and things sticking out on the sides. Build quality is fine but not as good as a Hassie. Operation is more complicated than either a Hassie or Pentax. I definitely see where people are coming from saying the studio is its natural habitat but if you have a big plush bag to move it around in you'll be fine for short hikes from the car and back. Definitely a tripod-only camera. You <em>can</em> handhold it, of course, but only to say you've done it.</p>

[chrisnielsen]

I wouldn't get a Fuji just because of the lens being fixed. I weighed my RB the other day and a body, 120 back, WLF

and 50mm lens is 2.9 kg. My Nikon F5 with a 2.8 zoom was only slightly lighter. I put an Op/tech strap on it and I can

quite happily walk round with it all day no problem. Also, with that strap around your neck you can brace the camera against your body and that makes it easy to take shots off the tripod

[RaymondC]

<p>The inability and fixed lenses seems a worry. </p>

<p>I am looking at getting one around mid year. I just had a thought. The RB67 may be attractive for many people as it is a serious camera, a iconic WLF and it is cheap but I am thinking maybe rather than getting 2 just get 1 to keep it simple. I am just a hobbyist, LOL. So .. I thought about a Pentax 67. </p>

<p>It acts more like a SLR, a tad lighter but physically might be heaps smaller and more ergonomic. Which means I can use back home and overseas with a bit of work. A no. of landscape pro's use them like Tom Mackie, Lee Frost and even Jack Dykinga but he might of switched his Pentax 67 to a Nikon D3x by stitching images with his tilt shift lenses.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>I thought about a Pentax 67........ It acts more like a SLR</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Probably because it is an SLR, as are the RB67, RZ67, Bronica ETRS, SQ, etc, and the Hasselblad.</p>

[Christopher Sperry Photogr]

<blockquote>

<p>It acts more like a SLR</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Are you referring to acting more like a 35mm SLR? I used to own a Nikon F3. I would say that the most basic, picture taking operating principles of the Pentax 67 are similar to the F3 used in manual mode. The film loading and unloading, film advance, slow operating sequence, overall handling, and sheer weight and bulk are where the similarities end.</p>

<p>The loading of film in the P67 is straight forward, but can seem slow and awkward if you get out of practice, have cold fingers, or when the light is changing fast. The film should be advanced slowly and more carefully, especially compared to the slick advance of the F3. Once the film is advanced and the shutter is cocked, it is best to have your decision made to go ahead and trip the shutter. You don't want to leave the shutter cocked and sitting for weeks. I have a metered prism. After advancing the film, and prior to locking up the mirror, all composition, focusing, and metering has to be done, as the mirror is dropped by tripping the shutter. The more you use the P67, the faster it becomes. I would not compare the P67 to my Nikon F4 at all. I have not used the P67 hand held, but I intend to this winter using moderate to high speed B&W film.</p>

<p>I am willing to accept the weight of the Pentax, but I do carefully consider which lenses to bring along. I use the Lee system for neutral density filters. My Lee system includes the hood which holds the 105mm polarizer and has two filter slots. I have the lens adapter rings that allow me to use the same Lee system on all my slr cameras. I don't usually take the Pentax out for a stroll to see if I can get some shots. It's usually more project driven: something I have in mind, and may have scouted in advance. The best way to accept the weight and bulk of the Pentax 67, plus the sturdy tripod, is to experience the output. Until you view the chrome on the light table, and even better, stand three feet from a large print of your work, it's all just theory and specs on a page.</p>

<p>Other professionals: Robert Glenn Ketchum, James Kay, Kerrick James.</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>Yes in respect to the 35mm SLR. </p>

<p>Just that the P67 might be more easier to use than the others outside and not going down to a smaller 645 format.</p>

[m_dawg]

<p>As others have mentioned, the difference between 135 and 6x7 is enormous. But then again digital is also much better than 135, so it's not saying too much.</p>

<p>The Pentax was popular, to some extent, because it was the "budget" 6x7 camera, offering good performance for less money, not because it's inherently better than the other options. I like the Mamiya cameras simply because of the rotating backs. The Hasselblad is, of course, my favorite form-factor-wise. All should be great.</p>

<p>Just be sure to use a cable release. Makes a big difference.</p>

[chrisnielsen]

<p>The RB67 is very easy to use! Set your aperture and shutter speed, pull the darkslide, focus and fire. Then cock and wind. Easy! Don't forget you can use a Polaroid back on the RB but not on a Pentax 67</p>

[Christopher Sperry Photogr]

<blockquote>

<p>the difference between 135 and 6x7 is enormous. But then again digital is also much better than 135, so it's not saying too much.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ray- Buckle your seat belt, 'cause here we go . . .</p>

[randyhargraves]

<p>Rb67 is one of the best values in photography in my opinion. A 6x7 transparency is hard to beat. 4x5 is of course that much better, but at a much steeper learning curve and higher failure rate (in my experience). Be sure to get one with good light seals and an accurate shutter. You can use your DSLR to meter or invest in an incident meter. </p>

[Christopher Sperry Photogr]

<blockquote>

<p>Rb67 is one of the best values in photography in my opinion</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And your black & white Rb67 photo of The Little Cahaba River is very nice. When viewed large, the detail comes out. I'll bet it makes a beautiful print.</p>

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Just be sure to use a cable release. Makes a big difference.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><em>Sometimes</em> makes a big difference. I think a tripod will make more difference.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>The RB67 is very easy to use! Set your aperture and shutter speed, pull the darkslide, focus and fire.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My dark slides stay in the bag (or at home). It's very easy to have the slide not fully in* and the shutter will still fire resulting in blank negatives. You only need to put the slide in if you want to take the film back off to exchange it for another one mid roll. Film can be changed with the film back still on the camera and this is the way I do it.</p>

<p>(* Just 1/8" out is enough)</p>

[m_dawg]

<p>Yes, a tripod is way, way more important than a cable release (although a cable release is $10 so you have no excuse). With MF I find I need a lot more light than with 135 so my shutter speeds are in the "absolutely need a tripod" range unless I'm shooting at noon.</p>

<p>The real deal for the money (if you shoot low volume) is a monorail and caltar ii-n lenses. But large format is expensive when it comes to film and processing. If you like shooting film, MF can't be beat.</p>

<p>Otherwise, the 5D isn't too expensive!</p>

[larry_freytag]

<p>Yes, it is time to switch to medium format film. Best bang for the buck and you can forget all the digital<br />issues such as narrow range of exposure. Now, about your camera; I use both the Mamiya RB67 and a Hasselblad 501. Honestly, the Mamiya is just a tank to carry around and the little Hassy is super easy to use in the field. Plus the lenses are honestly better. If you have to pick one I would pick the Hasselblad. Have fun.</p>