Choosing A medium format camera,

[simon_sutcliffe]

<p>Hi im Simon and im a 13 years old, My parents have a space where I can have a Darkroom which used to be one, I was looking to try and getting a primarily B/W camera, I will probably taking the camera to many places I go, I am looking to usually enlarge past 11x17 but not by much, Portability is #1 becuase I end up having to travel quite a bit and interchangeability is(Prisms and lense) #2, My question is What medium format camera would be best suited for what I use My budget is between 300-400 at maximum. I was looking at RB67, Broncia ERTSI which is around 200$ with two lenses.</p>

[christoph_sensen]

<p>Hi Simon,<br>

I had my first darkroom when I was 14. That was a long time ago, but I still remember how much fun it was. If you want to take your camera places, you are much better off with the Bronica than with the Mamiya RB. That one is more for studio photography. Good luck with finding the right camera!<br>

Christoph</p>

[mtk]

<p>Hi Simon, I agree with Christoph. Check out KEH bargain stuff for the Bronica, you may get even more than you think for 200 bucks! I have two RB's. Using an RB out of the studio (which I do) can be "cumbersome" at times. Good luck and a great choice!<br>

Mark</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Bronica or you may want to consider the Mamiya M645 (get a pro or later if you can)</p>

[jean_yves_mead]

The Mamiya 645 1000S with 80mm f/2.8 and waist-level finder is very light and easy to carry, and good ones can be found for reasonable money. For your budget you should also be able to add a prism finder for the odd occasion when you'll need one, and a decent second-hand meter (or new if you go for a Sekonic L-208 TwinMate).

 

Having said all that, don't count out 35mm cameras - especially if portability is a main requirement.

[sfcole]

<p>I'm wondering what you mean by "usually enlarge past 11x17 but not by much." One thing you should do is investigate standard enlarging paper sizes, because they differ somewhat from inket papers. What you will usually find are 11x14, then 16x20. If you have not worked with 16x20, just be warned: this paper is expensive, and processing it will take up a lot of room and chemicals. You'll need room for at least 3-4 trays side-by-side. You'll also need vertical room to crank your enlarger up, and a large space just to fit the paper under the enlarger in a frame. When you don't get a perfect print, each of those expensive sheets goes into the trash. I'd recommend starting smaller until you start to really know your way around a darkroom, or your $300-400 budget will be blown on paper and chemicals.</p>

[simon_sutcliffe]

<p>Cole, I meant enlarging to like 11x14-16x20 would be the most normal size,I was looking at the cost of a m645 and the cost is pretty much similar as the cost of the ETRSI with 2 lenses, Right now I am looking at 40% camera and 60% darkroom for the cost. Are there any other medium format cameras that are in this similar price range? </p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>Hi Simon. How wonderful it must be to be starting your adventures in photography now, when good film gear has never been cheaper and digital is also an option.</p>

<p>My personal bias is toward the Mamiya 645 system. I've tried others and they all have cost/reliability/usability/availability issues. As others have suggested an M645 1000s will probably give you the best value for money, but the ProTL will also give the option of interchangeable backs at a slightly higher cost. Personally I don't like the way Bronicas sound or vibrate when they're "let off".</p>

<p>Things to check on the 1000s are: The state of the foam-plastic light seals first and foremost since they tend to degrade into a sticky goo. These can be cheaply replaced with neoprene, but it's a messy and lengthy DIY job. Also check that the battery compartment cover isn't bent or broken and hinges open easily. Check that the frame counter zeroes properly when the back is opened and the film insert is removed. Check that it has a 120 film insert, not 220. Check the mirror for corrosion or scratches and the lens mount and film rollers for wear. The self-timer will probably stick, but this is common if it hasn't been used in a while. Working the self-timer will usually get it moving again if this is important to you. If a prism finder is fitted (and I recommend you get a prism finder or AE finder) then check that there isn't a thin black line running across the viewfinder - again a common problem but not easily fixable.</p>

<p>If all the above is in order then the camera should give you many years of trouble-free use. And I sincerely hope that you're still as keen on photography in 50 years time as myself. If only I had a time machine to see what cameras will be like in another 50 years time, or to go back and warn myself not to get so hung up on equipment!</p>

<p>Forget 35mm if quality is important to you!</p>

<p> </p>

[peter_mellis]

<p>I also started in photography at 13 (55 years ago) and had a setup/knockdown darkroom in an apartment bathroom. Worked that way until I went to college and started using the school's darkroom, which was twice the size of my parent's entire apartment (and other people cleaned up!).<br>

I have an RZ67 and agree that it is too big to tote around, especially if you have small hands. I also have a Mamiya 1000S and think that is a pretty good size/form if you want to carry an MF camera in the field. A TLR might also be a good way to go from a convenience standpoint, but most wouldn't give you the ability to change lenses. If you are going to carry an MF kit with you, set aside some money for a good bag that will protect the equipment, give you good access to it and (very important) be comfortable for you to carry.</p>

[jennifer_spencer]

<p>Whatever you buy, I would consider trying to hold one of the cameras in your hand before you buy it, or if you buy online, make sure there's a very good return policy.</p>

<p>I think, especially with medium format, there is a big difference between the feel of different cameras. Some of them have prism viewfinders, some of them are waist-level and others have a top-finder with no prism (unless someone installed a prism as an extra). It affects the way a person is going to compose a picture - for me, it's a big change. I have a great TLR, but it's a waistfinder. I have a hard time composing pictures and I'm lucky if I get a good keeper once per roll of 12. I love the thing and I am still working to improve, but with my Nikon 35mm, my good-to-crud ratio is more like 1 in 5 or 7. The eye viewfinder makes it for me. The weight of some of these cameras is highly variable too, and I don't want that to interfere with my using a camera. I don't know if you had considered that. </p>

<p>I would double check some buzz on the reliability of the Bronica you are considering. I had a Bronica SQ from the 60s and that thing was a dog. It felt good in hand and was good to use, for about a day and a half until the shutter failed. There were design problems due to cheap materials - an attempt to save cost to the customer that backfired. When Bronicas work, they are great, but I believe the Mamiya line is far more reliable. I know the Bronica fans here may get upset with me for saying that, but I doubt I am the first one to say it or think it, and my camera repairman was of similar opinion after 40 years in business. At least check on it before you make a decision. Whatever you buy, you need something you can depend on for your money, a camera that will be a trusty friend and a ready tool. A camera that will not be an encumbrance, a hassle or a wallet-drainer. </p>

<p>I applaud you for going with film - you will have a great time with it and learn a lot! Have fun!</p>

[Gary Naka]

<p>If you have not written off 35mm for a good reason, I suggest that you consider 35mm as your first starting point for a film camera, for MANY reasons.<br>

- Film is cheaper, because you get more shots per roll; 36 vs 12. Both cost of film and developing.<br>

- Easy to use and carry, much more so than a MF SLR. Just stay away from the high end pro stuff (like the Nikon F4 with the MB21 pack...ugh) which gets HEAVY and bulky and can rival a MF SLR for bulk and weight. My 35mm lenses are smaller and lighter than their equivalent MF lens, so packs in a smaller space and is lighter to carry.<br>

- Interchangable lenses. You have a better assortment of lenses.<br>

- For interchangable prisms you have to go with the more expensive Nikon F series.</p>

[andrew_kleinfeld]

<p>You might want to take a look at a used Rolleicord Va or Vb, or Koni-Omega, or Rolleiflex if you can afford it and find a good buy. They're excellent and way underpriced. And it's easy to make superb big enlargements from the big negatives, especially with ISO 100 120 film. Or if you're unsure, maybe a Yashicamat 124g, even cheaper, but not as good. </p>

[simon_sutcliffe]

<p>What would the difference between a Nikon F3 with waist level viewfinder vs a Broncia ETRSI/ Mamiya M645 there about the same price?</p>

[Gary Naka]

<p>IMHO, the F3 would be much easier to use with a prism rather than a WLF. The WLF would be used for low angle shots or on a tripod for studio type shots. You could use the WLF all the time, my father used a WLF on his Exacta. But I think you loose the handling speed of a 35mm SLR when you use the WLF over the prism. But a lot will also depend on what and how you plan to shoot.</p>

[randy_cooprider1]

<p>Simon, if you are planning to develop the film, MF is more forgiving than35mm for dust and dirt. Also with your estimated print size, cropping a MF neg will have higher resolution than a cropped 35 neg. Having said that, I find that if I am going to carry the camera all day, I tend to grab the lightest (35mm) first. Sometimes i just take the Olympus stylus which is super light and in most cases does almost as well as a high end (heavy) 35mm. MF definitely has the higher quality but it is also more difficult to lug around. Have a great time exploring your photographic options.</p>

[eric_mogren]

<p>I began shooting film when I was twelve -- let's just say that was a long time ago...<br>

I second the suggestion for a 35mm camera. I my first camera was an Argus C3 brick. I shot two Pentax K1000 cameras (froze one solid and shattered the mechanism on a mountaineering trip, sold the other), and still have two Pentax MX cameras and very old Honeywell Pentax. The advantage to these sorts of cameras is that they are durable, light weight, easy to use, and have very good internal light meters that help teach you how to shoot film. Best of all, today these cameras can be purchased used at places for around $150-$200 (if you buy used Pentax, buy the Japanese made ones, not the Hong Kong or Chinese made ones), can be serviced (if necessary) very reasonably, and used lenses are easy to find and fairly inexpensive. I found in years past that most BW film has such good grain that blowing-up 35mm to 8x10, or even 11x16, was not a problem. For your budget, you can buy an excellent Pentax set-up with two lenses at least.<br>

Good Luck, and have fun whatever you decide! </p>

[andre_noble5]

<p>I disagree with the 35mm suggestion. The boy should get a MF camera, tripod, light meter and learn how to take pictures right from the beginning.</p>

[jean_yves_mead]

How does shooting 35mm prevent him from doing this?

[sebastianmoran]

<p>When I was a kid, I used a Century Graphic, 6x9 camera (actually 2 1/4 x 3 1/4). </p>

<p>The old lenses have character. The camera is simple and makes every part of itself quite evident, helping you connect with every aspect of its workings. With a Kalart rangefinder, it was a terrific rig handheld, on tripod, even with groundglass at times. You can explore, with limits, shifts and tilts of the lens. You can look at the negatives or chromes by naked eye. I learned a lot and had a good time with this camera.</p>

<p>I was sad when my Dad got rid of it. Much later, I bought one for myself.</p>

<p>I would recommend a "baby" Graphic if you can find one in good condition.</p>

[eric_mogren]

<p>Andre Noble:<br>

I am not certain how a MF camera offers a beginner any better training in photography than a 35mm from the beginning. Indeed, it is likely more cost-effective to shoot 35mm than 120, which can be helpful for a beginner who wants to experiment and generally learn how to balance all the factors that go into film shooting. I know that I appreciated already knowing how to shoot film before I took the MF plunge. I would also offer different advice regarding a tripod. Of the hundreds of thousands of images I have shot over the years, I very, very seldom used a tripod -- and for many of those years I shot Kodachrome 25, which was about the slowest film on the planet, without a need for a tripod.</p>

[bob_everding]

<p>Simon, you have alot to think over here. Lots of good arguments for 35mm and for MF. I didn't have a choice, I was given a Yashica 124G when I was 17 and with a good mentor was off taking candid pictures. I was going to tell you to get a cheap TLR and go from there, but I think at this point you could use a good mentor close to you. Whichever camera you get either post pictures here for review......there will be tons of virtual mentors here to help you or find that mentor out for you locally.</p>

<p>Honestly, at first I hated the fixed lens of the Yashica, but what it did was make me work on my composition.....get comfortable moving in and out for the "right" shot. Most every shot I made for a year, we reviewed for composition and sharpness. I got alot of feedback, but asking the question of "how do I do this better" or "what would you have changed" helped my become a much better photographer. Having a MF camera with a standard lens and a telephoto would have been nice at the time but one lens taught me alot about how and what to take a picture of.</p>

<p>Bob E.</p>

[uconnjames]

<p>RB67 will be too heavy for you, especially when you travel a lot. Broncia ERTSi is not light either. I personally suggest Yashica 124G. Although it's a TLR with fixed lens, it can go with you anywhere. The best camera is the one that you have with you all the time. And it's cool to use a TLR too!</p>

[simon_sutcliffe]

<p>Right Now I am thinking of four options<br />Option 1. Bronica ETRSI With 120 back, 75, 50 ,150 lens, some prism or waist level., 250$<br />Option 2. Bronica SQAI with 120 back 80 mm lens and something else 300$<br />Option 3. Graflex 4x5 press camera no focal plane shutter, compactable, rangefinder. unknown.$<br />Option 4. Mamiya C330 with 80, 135. 450$<br />I am leaning towards 1 or 3</p>

[simon_sutcliffe]

<p>I am also free to your own combonations.</p>