Tips for Shooting Medium Format for a beginner

[kayla_kuris]

<p>Hello, <br>

If you haven't already seen any of my multiple questions on the beginner forum, I'll fill you in a bit.<br>

I bought a Minolta SR-T 101 on Halloween of this year with no prior experience with photography, digital or film. I researched a great deal on the basics of manual photography and have most if not all of it down, and boy am I completely hooked. Having a nice film camera has encouraged me to leave my house more and be more creative; I really just love it. And surprisingly to me, I've produced some good results as only a beginner. I've even apparently set off a new trend among my classmates because now everyone suddenly has a film camera or is wanting one!</p>

<p>I'm getting <a href="http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Collectible-YASHICA-MAT-EM-Twin-Lens-Reflex-Camera-W-Original-Case-/261125965842?nma=true&si=5QU2b79AGD5JEmqzeOgnygru66c%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557">this Yashica Mat EM</a> for Christmas, and I've done a bit of research on shooting with a TLR. I've heard many say that it's easy, if not easier than taking pictures with an SLR. Based from what I've read and seen it seems the opposite!</p>

<p>Can someone tell me a bit about the Yasica Mat EM, and the differences between shooting with a SLR and a TLR?</p>

<p>I know there is a sports finder on this camera, but I've read that it is advised not to use it. Why is that?</p>

<p>Thanks in advance...</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>First thing is to get the camera manual out and read it through (if you don't have it, you can Google the subject and probably download one for free). The TLR differs form the SLR by its separate viewing lens and downward facing groundglass image (you likely have a little magnifying glass that can pop into place) instead of an eye level prism looking at the SLR groundglass for focusing and viewing. No big deal for casual, unhurried photography. The sports finder is integrated into the focussing hood and is clearer but less accurate (but not greatly so) than the groundglass, so you will probably need to prefocus distance on the groundglass, or approximately by using the distance markings. it is useful for subjects at a certain distance andrelatively bright light where a small f stop will guarantee a certain depth of focus (depth of field).</p>

<p>Once you get the hang of it, you will find it easy to use. It is not as rapid in use as an SLR but you get nice size negatives or slides. Light readings are probably best made using a small hand exposure meter. Have fun.</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>here is the best free place to get manuals<br>

http://www.butkus.org/chinon/#AGFA<br>

ulktrafine <br>

http://www.ultrafineonline.com/<br>

ultrafine photography<br>

http://www.ultrafineonline.com/photography.html<br>

welcome to the world of photograpy</p>

<p> </p>

[leicaglow]

One thing we forget after using waist level finders for so many years is that they are reversed. There is a bit of a learning curve to get used

to a TLR, but I really like them.

[c_watson1]

<p>Here's the link to your EM's manual:</p>

<p>http://www.butkus.org/chinon/yashica/yashica_mat-em/yashica_mat_em.pdf</p>

<p>I'd really recommend getting a simple incident light meter. The EM's old selenium cell probably isn't accurate and won't help you judge whether your shutter speeds are on the money. You can use your SRT 101 for a ballpark reading but incident metering is usually fooled less often than your Minolta's reflected meter. Loading 120 film takes a bit of practice but you'll be down with it quick. As suggested above, DOF with MF is shallower than 35mm, so don't surprised if focus is off or hard to nail wide open or down one stop. Have fun and just work through the screw-ups.</p>

[donbright]

<p>I hear your excitement and enthusiasm for Photography coming through your post, and its very refreshing. That enthusiasm will be constantly generated through the pictures that you take. Remember we all had to go through several walls of understanding to get the technical stuff out of the way, as that happens, it just gets better, and better.</p>

[dan_daniel2]

<p>I can't really think of the best way to explain things about using a TLR. Once you get it and spend a little time with it, you'll get it? I think there are two interesting things. One is the reversed image- it immediately turns the photo you are about to take into something different than the world you are photographing. And this is heightened by the second thing- the ground glass image. Very different way of seeing the image than an SLR.</p>

<p>Another big thing I find with a TLR is that people are not threatened by it. Taking portraits, I think that the downward tilt of the photographer's head either throws people off or puts them at ease. There's a shared experienced between the photographer and the subject- both are looking at this silly box. Robert Doisneau put it somewhat differently: <small> You end up bowing before the subject, as if in prayer. Whereas with a 35mm camera, you put him straight in your line of fire – that is in your line of sight, so as to shoot right into his face. </small></p>

<p>He's an interesting guy to look over, Doisneau. He used a TLR for a couple of decades, most of his most famous images-<br>

http://blog.ricecracker.net/tag/robert-doisneau/</p>

[LenMarriott]

<p>Kayla, Here's a shot taken using Arthur's sports finder technique. Camera was pre-focused at about 7ft. The sports finder was used as the subject was moving and, knowing this was a one shot deal, I didn't want to be confused by the reversed image at a crucial moment. Best, LM.</p><div></div>

[User_502260]

<p>If you scan the medium format negatives on an entry level scanner you will not see a big jump in quality from the 35mm camera you have been using. In general I find 35mm cameras easier to use and more flexible than medium format cameras. My High School medium format camera was a Yashica Mat 124G. While using it was more tedious, printing the larger negatives (traditional b&w darkroom) was a joy. Another thing you might notice is that there are many interesting photos which can be made with a square format. Not all prints have to be rectangular. I now have medium format cameras using 4X4, 6X4.5, 6X6 and 6X7 formats. I probably use the 6X6 more than the others. If I know I will have to make a large rectangular print I will use the 6X7. </p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>Shooting with a medium format camera is more contemplative than with a 35mm. You have to take time to compose the image in the viewfinder, think about your aperture and shutter speed settings, wind the film then take the picture.</p>

<p>The workflow is a little faster than Large Format which is really contemplative, but it is much slower than an automatic DSLR or Point-and-shoot that does everything for you. You better start getting used to looking at an inverted picture in the viewfinder becuase it can get a little confusing. When you move the camera to the left the image moves to the right and when you move the camera to right the image moves to the left.</p>

<p>Usually, the image in the viewfinder is pretty bright even in dim lighting which should help in focusing. Some cameras even come with a magnifier to help you nail the focus, but I'm not sure if your camera comes with a focusing aid.</p>

<p>The thing to remember about shooting with a medium format camera is "Take your Time" .<br>

Pictures taken in haste will usually come out blurried, especially if you are using a longer lens. Unlike 35mm the safest shutter speed is about 1/125 at least on my camera. The good thing is, all the pain goes away when you develop the pictures. That's when you become really glad that you own an MF.</p>

[szrimaging]

I recently picked up a Yashicamat EM myself. For me, there is a charm in shooting on ground glass that no 35mm SLR

can match.

 

As for shooting, the inverted left and right is something to get used. My fiancé keeps telling me I look drunk as I try to get

it right. That said, it helps break the photographing what you see, and to start looking at your composition. Not as much

as a fully inverted 4x5 (very fun to shoot), but still great, and much more portable.

 

Enjoy the camera!

[Karim Ghantous]

<blockquote>

<p>Shooting with a medium format camera is more contemplative than with a 35mm.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree with that. It might explain why it's such an enjoyable process. But I was late to the MF party. I took my first rolls of 120 film a few months ago with a 6x6 folder from the 1950s.</p>

<p>Last week I took another roll with my new Lomography Belair X 6-12, a non-reflex 6x12 folder with interchangeable lenses. Silly me, I did most things right but forgot to set the focus and as a consequence the background in all shots is very soft. I'll have to take those shots again, now.</p>

<p>I'm also hoping to do some portraits with these cameras so that will be interesting.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I've even apparently set off a new trend among my classmates because now everyone suddenly has a film camera or is wanting one!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Interesting! I wonder why, exactly. Well, who cares. :-) Anyway, if you ever get a chance to use a folding camera, I suspect you'll like the experience as much as I did.</p>

[brett_rogers]

<p>Off topic, but any idea who the chap in the photo with The Queen is? It's not the Duke of Edinburgh, and not her father George VI. That's some serious silverware on his chest.</p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>I've done a bit of research on shooting with a TLR. I've heard many say that it's easy, if not easier than taking pictures with an SLR. Based from what I've read and seen it seems the opposite!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It is the opposite for most people. I wouldn't rush out and commit to one style of camera or system. Medium format film gear is getting so inexpensive you may just want to get a relatively cheap starter camera while you research what you really want to sink some money into. I started with a Bronica ETRS. You can find a complete SLR with speed grip, prism finder, 75mm PE lens and even metering prism for roughly $300. And if you decide to sell it and move on to another system you can get rid of it without too much of a financial hit. I moved on to a Rollei 6008i system. It is such a joy to shoot with I would never use an all manual TLR camera again. It is a matter of taste and no one can tell you what you will personally prefer. My camera is pretty much brand new and everything can be put on full auto except focusing. Although there is an auto focus model for substantially more. My only concern with the autofocus is MF lenses have a lot of glass to move around and the autofocus seemed like a mechanical device just waiting to break. I may be paranoid.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>If you scan the medium format negatives on an entry level scanner you will not see a big jump in quality from the 35mm camera you have been using.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh, I beg to differ. Even on an Epson V500 the difference is obvious.</p>

[fwstutterheim]

<p>"What you get is better than what you see".</p>

<p>That goes for DOF of a TLR image. The viewing lens is wide open all the time with limited DOF. The taking lens, when stopped down, gives better DOF than seen on the finder screen. Small focusing errors will disappear in the DOF. </p>

[LenMarriott]

<p>Brett, not sure who the decorated dude is but I did get a shot of the Duke using the same technique. Thanks for your interest. Best, LM.</p>

[LenMarriott]

<p>Brett, not sure who the decorated dude is but I did get a shot of the Duke using the same (sports finder) technique. Thanks for your interest. Best, LM.</p><div></div>

[Bill Bowes]

<p>Hello everyone, and welcome to the world of Med Format Kayla. Scoll down this forum until you see "Just got a Yashica". Several pages of worthwhile info about the Yashica TLR you have as well as general advice on how to use it. Enjoy! Bill</p>

[Bill Bowes]

<p>Hello again. I forgot to mention that on page 2 of this forums topics, you will find a discussion on "Yashicamat 124". The model 124 is a bit "newer" than your EM, but the cameras have the same body components...just different meters, neither really trustworthy!. Go thru this topic for some more vg info. Bill</p>

[starshooter]

<p>I shot photos of celebrities in Hollywood in the 1960s and 1970s with a Yashicamat and/or a Nikon F. The eye-level sportsfinder is great. You just have to remember that what you see is not 100 percent what you will get. There's a parallax problem but the sports finder is a must for fast action. I have always said a 35mm is really nice and handy but you begin to appreciate the 120 size, such as with the Yashicamat, when you get into the darkroom. I am now making large-sized prints (11x14, 16x20) of my old Hollywood stuff for art gallery sales and many of my 35mm shots blow up real good but the blowups from the Yashicamat are effortless because of that big negative. I have a Yashicamat that I used in the 1960s and it still works well. I just bought another one in fabulous shape because I could not resist buying the darn thing. Great camera. Fun to use.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Len, good timing on your photos of the British royalty, showing that the TLR is a more versatile instrument than it first appears (maybe the person in your photo is Lord Mountbatten?). Not sure that Kayla wants to scan or develop (if B&W film) her 120 images, but in each case the medium format camera is a good choice. </p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

If we want proof that a TLR is "versatile" we would also need to see how it does something else than reportage. Some architecture, wildlife, reproduction, interior, product, macro perhaps? Anything people invented those different focal length lenses and single lens reflex viewing for? ;-)<br><br>Anyway, have fun with your Yashicamat!<br>You are right that using a TLR is not as easy as an SLR. Not seeing through the taking lens limits it use in close-up photography. And you have to guess at how the out of focus parts look (no DOF preview on the taking lens). The waist level finder's reversed image takes some getting used to (but you will get used to it and find it easy enough to use). Having only one focal length can be fun, but eventually you will want more.<br>But that doesn't mean you can't have lots of fun using a TLR, with all the inherent limitations. So enjoy the camera when it arrives!

[q.g._de_bakker]

Correction: No DOF preview on the <i>viewing</i> lens, of course.

[kayla_kuris]

<p>Thank you so much for the tips everyone.</p>

<p>I actually read the manual a couple times before buying it. And gosh how different it seems from an SLR. The part that I think intimidates me the most is the difference between the viewing and taking lens. How hard is it to focus? I'm under the impression it's rather difficult. </p>

<p>And how do you deal with the parallax problem? Because I really like taking pictures of things up close.]</p>

<p>Again thanks for all the responses they help a great deal!</p>

[szrimaging]

<p>Focusing is REALLY easy on a TLR. Just turn the knob. In the case of a Yashica, the viewing lens matches your widest aperture so if it is in focus there, then when you take the image, at say f8, it will most definitely be in focus.</p>

<p>Parallax isn't a big problem unless you are doing really close or critical work.</p>