A *real* medium format camera - Am I worthy?

[colin_dullaghan]

<p>Hi there, and thanks in advance for any guidance you can share. I am a photo enthusiast and a fascinated but talent-free new dad who never intends to make a living doing this. I take lots and lots of pictures, mostly awful, but have only recently gotten interested in shooting with film.</p>

<p>It actually followed the exact path mentioned by one Russ Rosener on May 28, 2009 (I did do a preliminary search to see if this had been answered already): A Holga got me shooting film, and I enjoy the simplicity and light weight. (Even more than that, though, I enjoy the beauty of the scans from the 120 film, especially the one roll of Velvia I took with me on our recent Florida vacation!)" Russ went on to say to the original poster that "...perhaps then you'll decide to upgrade to a quality small medium format camera like the Zeiss Ikonta or Nettar, or the Voigtlander Bessa...there are many and they can be cheaper than the Holga!"</p>

<p>Well, that's where I am. I've been shooting with the Holga and my Pentax K-x, which I love but have to admit is outnumbered in the "our favorite photos" category by its cheap plastic counterpart. I've also been having fun with an Argus C3 someone threw into a craigslist deal last Fall. I even bought a Yashica Electro 35, largely on the recommendation of Karen Nakamura's website and Matt Denton's. It's great, but I think I need to start shooting with film that hasn't been expired for three years. I've had similarly underexposed results from the Pentax ME Super I got to to complement the K-x (and share lenses between the two.)</p>

<p>Which brings me to the next purchase. I know from the Holga that I love big, square negatives, and I even love looking forward to picking up those negatives from the local photo lab. Bringing them home, holding them up to the light, carefully scanning in the wife's Canoscan 8800... it's all fun. But I'm getting an itch to try out a "real" medium format camera.</p>

<p>I plan to trade in a Nikon FM2 and our old Canon Rebel XT to KEH this week. I'd like to just get "store credit," since I know that if they send a check it'll disappear into the family bank account and never result in anything fun. The sales guy I talked to, Dan, suggested the Mamiya or Pentax 645s, and I actually lean toward the Mamiya despite my love for the other Pentaxes I've got so far. </p>

<p>But other posts here have gotten me thinking about some interesting alternatives, including Jurgen Kreckel's gorgeous folders and the Yashica 124. My concern is whether I'd be disappointed with a folder or a TLR, compared to a "real" medium format camera like the Mamiya. Alternatively, since I'm new to this, I'm not sure if now's a good time to buy the 645 gear anyway -- didn't the digital backs just come out and drive prices unusually high? Would the RB67 be a better idea?</p>

<p>Basically, I just want something easy to use and sharper than a Holga, for less than $400 or so. And since I'm chasing a 2-year-old a lot of the time, not to mention going on canoeing and motorcycling mini-adventures, I'm hoping to find something relatively portable and (more importantly) able to capture motion in less than full sunlight. (If the 80mm 1.8 lens for the Mamiya 645 was within my price range, this might've been a done deal!)</p>

<p>So any recommendations you've got would be welcome. Bronica, Baldax, Bag The Whole Idea and Just Get Better Lenses or a Flash for Your Pentax. I'm all ears. Here's my current favorite from my Flickr page, and an idea of what I'm trying to improve on:<br>

</p>

<p>Thanks again.<br>

Colin Dullaghan</p><div></div>

[jim_mcdermott1]

<p>Colin, <br>

At various times, I've owned a Pentax 645 (the original version), wide angle Plaubel Makina 6x7, Mamiya 6, Bronica SQ, Rolleis (3.5f, T, 6002, 6003, Rolleicord VB). All offer very different experiences; all were/are great fun to use. Depending on what your needs are, something like a Pentax will <em>potentially</em> be more versatile than, say, a Yashicamat. I still have 2 Rolleis. The 6003 is up there with the most sophisticated system cameras in the medium format world, and it takes pictures that are not a whit more stunning than those produced by my 1965 Rollei T. <br>

Don't worry too much about the equipment - it's all real. Once you start looking at those gloriously-sized images, the box won't matter so much.</p>

[ingemar_lampa1]

<p>Get a Hasselblad and be done with it. Eventually you may get there anyhow. :)</p>

[michael_linn]

<p><em>Basically, I just want something easy to use and sharper than a Holga, for less than $400 or so.</em></p>

<p>OK. Have you looked at a 645 folder<em>?</em> 1950's 16-on-120 from Fuji-Daichi-Petri etc.? Fits in your pocket and is lighter than some of the 35mm's you have used.</p>

<p>Or try a Yashica or similar TLR. Don't spend $400 up front just to get a used slr. I'm at about $100 or less in my recommendations, and you should find out your comfort and fun level there before you dig in deeper. If the $100 medium format camera just does not not give you what you are seeking, the more expensive stuff is unlikely to help. The $100 camera will be a better camera than you are a photographer until you catch up with it.<em><br /></em></p>

[User_5888660]

<p>My go to camera is the Mamiya 7 II. But, you won't find one in the $400 range. When I want something smaller, I use my Fuji GA645. The fuji has a very good lens and a good meter. It would work well for shooting your little one. The auto focus is a bit noisy. I took the Fuji on a golf trip to Scotland last year and was very happy with the results. They weren't as good as the Mamiya, but the camera fit in my golf bag, which the Mamiya wouldn't. If you don't mind a rangefinder, the Fuji may just meet your needs.</p>

<p>The RB/RZ systems are terrific. But, they are big--very big. I use an RZ in the studio. It stays in the studio, however. </p>

[mark_lewis2]

<p>Another vote for the Mamiya 6 or 7, just save the pennies a bit longer. </p>

[andylynn]

<p>TLRs are cool, some have excellent optics and most are under $200. Add a handheld meter for good luck.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>Judging from your question I would say you are not worthy of a real MF format camera like a Rolleiflex TLR. Stick with something cheap and bad like a holga.<br>

Dennis</p>

[sfcole]

<p><strong>Get a Hasselblad and be done with it. Eventually you may get there anyhow. :)</strong></p>

<p>What he said</p>

[greg_campbell1]

<p>I'll throw in another irrational personal preference! You can buy a Bronica 6x6 kit for about $400, although this will likely not include a metered finder. (Looking at KEH and Fleabay, they seem to have gone UP in price recently.) This won't buy you a phat dose of 'Blad Snobbery, but it will leave you with a competent camera; sharp and reasonably well built. The SQ series does use some plastic in the bodies; they are sturdy enough given normal use, if not indestructible. The lenses are old school steel and brass and are essentially bomb proof.</p>

<p>Bronica's fastest 6x6 lens is the 80mm 2.8, the others are f/4 or worse. (This will be true for most MF systems - in general, the larger the format, the slower the affordable lenses.)</p>

<p>More at:<br>

http://www.tamron-usa.com/bronica/prod/assets/pdf/br_cat.pdf<br>

<a href="http://www.tamron-usa.com/bronica/slr_archives.asp">http://www.tamron-usa.com/bronica/slr_archives.asp</a></p>

<p>Feel free to holler or e-mail me if you've got any SQ-specific questions.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>In short: 'skill level' or 'ability' has nothing to do with what equipment you use, so if you want to try something, the only thing stopping you from doing so is yourself. If you're recording family life, I think size, speed and weight can be important... I think the Fuji GA645 would be a good choice for that reason, if you'd want medium format film. Enjoy!</p>

[jim_momary]

<p>Backtracking to your comment ---<br>

<em>"...but I think I need to start shooting with film that hasn't been expired for three years. I've had similarly underexposed results from the Pentax ME Super..."</em><br>

Under exposure can come from many factors. Metering issues, shutter issues, etc. But with the 'older' cameras you mentioned one culprit can be the battery.<br>

The Electro 35 needed mercury batteries, I presume you used a modern alkaline replacement. That alone would lead to under exposure. Read up on measures to replace merc. cells with hearing aid batteries or special adapters that alter the voltage.<br>

Pentax ME Super is commented on a lot to do better with silver oxide cells, is that what you used there?</p>

<p>And, with MF film you WILL love the detail and tonality.<br>

Jim M</p>

[colin_dullaghan]

<p>Wow, I go to bed wondering if anyone will read my post, and wake up to nine responses! Thanks very much for all of you weighing in.<br>

Jim, you've given me several new "boxes" to start learning about… particularly the Rollei T, which sounds most likely to fit my budget and aesthetic. (Playing with the Argus has shown me that old cameras can still have great lenses.) The Mamiya 6 would indeed be just about ideal, if I could afford it. Maybe I should wait and learn the 35mm cameras better…</p>

<p>Ingemar, your suggestion made me laugh -- then shudder as I pictured my daughter knocking a Hasselblad onto the sidewalk!</p>

<p>Michael, I'd seen those names, but hadn't really looked into the 645 folders yet. The only ones I was starting to read up on were the Zeisses and Agfas. Adding that to the list… And your advice about starting small is well taken. I'm well aware that *all* my cameras -- from the K-x to the lowly Argus -- are better than I am. Well, maybe not the Holga!</p>

<p>Oh, on the Yashica TLR, yes, that was my first inclination, but right now it looks like KEH is asking $250+ for one in decent condition. That's what got me thinking 645, even though I love the square format.</p>

<p>Allen, this GA645 you speak of sounds very intriguing. Hadn't even heard of that one yet -- further evidence of the scattershot nature of internet research.</p>

<p>Greg, I'm glad to see someone speak up on behalf of Bronica. I don't know much about the distinctions between those systems and the ones from Pentax/Mamiya, so it sounds like I need to do even *more* research. Thanks, also, for offering to field SQ questions via email. I may just take you up on that.</p>

<p>Richard, the first word that jumped out at me in your response was "reason," which is funny because it sounds like in you're the voice of it. I was kind of fooling myself to think I'd tote a 6-lb, manual focus RB67 to the zoo, just to capture my kid feeding the giraffes. Another vote for the Fuji. Speaking of which, maybe I should restrict my search to auto-focus options… a couple of people seem to have gently suggested that. Still, for quick, on the run stuff, my dSLR does do everything for me in an instant. The meaningful, methodical procedure of film loading, range finding and light metering (as well as a finite number of exposures) really appeals to me for making moments "special."</p>

<p>And Jim, thanks for those suggestions. My Electro 35 does indeed have a modern battery replacement, and the ME Super is loaded with cheap LR44 cells I got in a ten-pack somewhere. That might explain why my pictures consistently seem to need shadow reduction in Photoshop, even when I was shooting with brand-new slide film.</p>

<p>Thanks again, to all. It's amazing to get such expert advice, made personal, for free, near instantaneously. Hooray for the internet.</p>

 

[colin_dullaghan]

<p>Also, a quick browse of the Medium Format/Beginner section now shows me that "which camera?" questions are already quite plentiful. Sorry about overlooking that before, and thanks again for fielding my inquiry anyway.</p>

 

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>This may seem obvious, but a 645 isn't going to give you the square pictures you've declared a love for. A Yashicamat 124 or an older (and maybe cheaper) plain vanilla Yashicamat would fit the bill of giving you square pictures. The lens on the older Yashicamats is slightly better, IMHO, than that fitted to the later 124G model. However both models have lenses infinitely better than that fitted to the Holga, and since the scanner you're using isn't going to make the most of an expensive lens, then either model would do.</p>

<p>The superior lens quality of a 'Blad, or of any other MF SLR for that matter, would really be wasted unless you're going to upgrade your scanner. Having said that a Mamiya 645 J, M or 1000s model can be picked up for not-a-lot of cash these days, while Yashica 124Gs are ridiculously overpriced for what they are. I've used the Mamiya 645 system for longer than I care to remember and can heartily recommend it for durability and ease of use, but square it ain't.</p>

[john_c16]

<p>For the money, 6x6, PLUS interchangeable lenses try a Mamiya TLR. Currently at KEH you could get:</p>

<p>http://www.keh.com/camera/Mamiya-Twin-Lens-Reflex-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-MT020090317910?r=FE</p>

<p>$165</p>

<p>And: http://www.keh.com/camera/Mamiya-Twin-Lens-Reflex-Fixed-Focal-Length-Lenses/1/sku-MT060008000820?r=FE</p>

<p>$139</p>

<p>A lot of people will tell you to stay away from the chrome shutters, but I say they're cheap enough now that if the shutter gives you problems and is unrepairable you can just buy another one.</p>

<p> </p>

[wogears]

<p>Second the recommendation for a Mamiya TLR. My C330f cost me $208 with the 135mm lens, which I find very sharp and contrasty.</p>

[guy_e]

<p>I went this exact route several years ago... and the first step beyond the Holga for me was a Yashica 124 which I picked up from the Camera Doctor in Atlanta, GA. The guy who runs the shop specializes in rebuilding Yashicas, and I have to say, compared to the Hasselblad 501CM I got later, the 124 is _tack sharp_, whereas the 'blad is a bit more, let's say "loose", when it comes to the focusing.</p>

<p>Now, the 124 does give me troubles when winding film from time to time, but, if your budget is fixed, it's a good option to consider. I would bring up one other point which I didn't see mentioned here... being a fellow dad, time is not on your side, and your new child will grow very quickly over the next year. The camera you don't have now will not do you any good in preserving those memories. Or, as another forum's motto goes - "Buy now, explain later." :)</p>

 

[kris-bochenek]

<p>MAmiya RB67 Pro S could be had for $400 or so.</p>

[peter_simpson1]

<p>I recommend you do not trade in the FM2 to KEH. While they are a great place to buy stuff, they need to pay relatively low prices for trade-ins to offer those bargains on the other end. You will probably get well under $100 for it unless it's like new in box. The FM2 is a very nice camera, I would suggest selling it here or keeping it.</p>

<p>I'm also looking at MF cameras, but haven't come to a decision yet. A Rolleiflex (too much $ right now) or Yashica Mat 124 (affordable) is probably where I'll end up, a nice combination of simplicity and portability, because a camera isn't any use if you don't have it with you. The Hassy, Bronica, Mamiya SLRs are tempting, but everyone warns you about two things: they're can be mechanically demanding (cock both lens and body before removing lens, etc) and their weight is not insignificant. As a parent, I think you'd be happier with something simple and reliable that you can throw in a backpack and whip out when the moment presents itself, so TLR would be my suggestion. And TLRs have a nice vintage style all their own.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>You like medium format, you like square negatives, you want a good quality MF camera for $400.</p>

<p>Bronica SQ-A. End of story.</p>

[colin_dullaghan]

<p>Good "parent" points, Peter and Guy; I could definitely see myself holding up the show by dragging out a big SLR (and lenses) when I could have been ready to go -- and capture those moments -- if I had a TLR. Besides, I was leaning toward the waist-level finder for the SLR already. That's about the maximum height for shooting a three-foot tall person anyway, in my experience.</p>

<p>And the C33 John linked to (and you recommended, Les) seems like it could fit the bill quite well. I wish I could get a Yashica Mat 124 for about half what KEH is asking, though. </p>

[john_c16]

<p>If you're really looking for a Yashica, try to find an older YashicaMat (or Yashica Mat - they are 2 different models), Mat LM, EM or 12; or even a model D or C for that matter. They are a lot less 'trendy' to all the college photo students so they command lower prices. The shutters are fairly reliable but the cocking/winding mechanism can fail if abused except for the knob wind versions. For me, from a purely cost/value/reliability standpoint, the Mamiya takes the cake. The C22/C220 models would be even more reliable since there is no counter mechanism on the wind knob like there is on the earlier C/C2 models. Check out this link if you want to know more about the differences in models. http://www.tlr-cameras.com/japanese/Mamiya.html</p>

[rachelle_m.]

<p>Hi Colin,</p>

<p>First, I'd like to say that TLRs are "real" cameras. And when I first went to shoot medium format, that's what I started with -- mostly Minolta Autocords and Yashicas (I have about 8 now). My preference is for the Autocord -- great construction, great lens, some of my best photos have been taken with that camera.</p>

<p>However, over time I came to the conclusion that I wanted a bigger system that would allow me to change lenses, backs, etc. and looked into other square systems (I love the square) -- a Hasselblad was too expensive, so was the Mamiya rangefinder, and the Mamiya TLRs with interchangeable lenses seemed too heavy (SLR-like, which loses the benefit of the lightness of a TLR) without the benefit of an interchangeable back. So that basically left the Bronica (SQA in my case) and I have to say I am very happy with it. That said, I mostly shoot with the 80mm on it, which is the same lens as the TLRs.</p>

<p>Just as an aside, the bigger MF cameras that shoot 6x7 or larger are big. And heavy. I know some people shoot them handheld. But if I had a kid I'd want something light and portable and easy to deal with on the fly. And if you want a camera for motorcycling (think about the vibrations) and canoeing (water) I'd go for something cheap and easily replaceable (in your case, stick with the Holga for those activities). Anyway, just my two cents.</p>

[colin_dullaghan]

<p>Right, yes! Thanks Rachelle, and know that I actually didn't mean to imply the TLRs aren't real. I misspoke; I meant to say that a "real" medium format camera was one with a lens made of glass! In fact, the Yashica Mat was my original idea for the "good" camera I'd get out for special occasions (or just ones we wanted to *feel* special.)</p>

<p>And to John's point, the cost/value/reliability standpoint is mainly the standpoint I'm concerned with. So it does matter which is the better "deal," though I should probably just concern myself with the best camera for my purposes that fits my budget, regardless of issues of being overpriced/underpriced. </p>

<p>An older Yashica or a Mamiya TLR could well be it. And yes, I'd reserve the Holga for the waterborne outings. Maybe the motorcycling ones too -- I ride a single-cylinder enduro, and vibration is its calling card. </p>

<p>Still, the point made by Jamie, and earlier by Greg, is pretty compelling. The Bronica system seems to make lots of sense for me, and would really feel like a "big deal" to get it out and take some pictures. On dry land. While stationary. </p>

<p>Thanks again to all of you for advising me. I've gotten considerably more insight here than I could've found from days of web-browsing and chatting with the KEH sales staff. Plus, you know, they're busy selling stuff to everybody else...</p>