Do all 645 cameras have to be shot on the side

[steve_johnston9]

<p>Do all 645 cameras have to be shot on the side to get a landscape photograph. Are there any exceptions ?</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>Most give a landscape view the right way up. I think it's only the Bronica RF 645 which normally gives vertical images.</p>

[robert_marvin]

<p>6 X 4.5 SLRs that transport film vertically don't have to be held sideways to shoot horizontals; RF cameras, like the Bronica Mr. Johnson mentioned and Zeiss Super Ikonta As, that transport film horizontally do have to be held sideways to shoot horizontals. You get used to it.</p>

[paul_loveteck]

<p>Steve,<br>

It all depends of exactly what you mean by "all 645 cameras".<br>

Any Hasselblad V series with an A12 V magazine can shoot 645 without needing to be turned.<br>

You will get 12 frames on a 120 film roll.</p>

[BrianS1664879711]

<p>A12V is too rare and expensive for me to ever have physically handled, but I thought the "V" meant VERTICAL (AKA portrait orientation).</p>

[russ_britt3]

<p>What you have just discovered is the main reason I went to Hasselblad in 1980 and shoot square. Plus the Hassey is way more reliable, and better optics.<br>

<br />No need to ever rotate the camera now anymore,ever. <br />Yes I used to shoot 6.45 from 1974-1980.</p>

[tim_bosley1]

<p>From what I remember, the Fuji GA 645 line of rangefinders shot normally in portrait, but others like the Pentax 645, Mamiya 645, etc are already in landscape. </p>

[jim_momary]

<p>Alternate ...<br>

A Mamiya RB67 has a 645 film back available, the <em><strong>HA702</strong></em>, so you can rotate that to suit. Does that qualify as a 645? :o)</p>

[paul_loveteck]

<p>Brian:<br>

Yes, you are correct. V is for Vertical.<br>

I was not very clear: I meant that with an Hasselblad V series you can have both square and 645 Vertical or horizontal and never have the need to turn the camera. I mentioned the A12 V as many do not know it. You can get one pretty cheap today (will probably need a cla if you buy it on eBay).</p>

[jeff_livacich]

<p>If you mean do any 645 cameras have revolving backs, the answer is no. The Pentax 645 gives a choice of tripod sockets, one on the bottom and one on the side; a 3-way tripod head is not needed.</p>

[fwstutterheim]

<p>The Rolleiflex 6008 with the revolving Magazine 4560.</p>

[jeff_livacich]

<p>Sorry, I meant any exclusively 645 cameras, but the Rollei 6008 could be a practical 645 camera. </p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I can vouch for the fact that a Pentax 645n's double tripod socket makes a huge difference to the speed and accuracy of turning a camera on its side.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I can vouch for the fact that a Pentax 645n's double tripod socket makes a huge difference to the speed and accuracy of turning a camera on its side.</p>

[jim_peterson2]

<p>I'm curious to know how you use the second tripod socket. Especially since you speak so highly of it. I would think that since most tripod heads allow quick and easy 90 degree rotation it really wouldn't help that much. I've never used the second tripod hole unless I was planning to do an entire series of portrait orientation shots.</p>

[ondebanks]

<p>The only 645 <em>SLR</em> camera with a default portrait orientation that I can think of is a Kiev 60 converted to 645 format (by ARAX etc.). The film path and shutter travel are horizontal in these 6x6 bodies, so that is retained in the 645 conversion; the film gate is simply masked off on the sides to 645, and the film advance is adjusted for the narrower frame size. I never really saw the point of these converted cameras however - using their great P6-fit lenses on a real 645 SLR gives exactly the same images, with a lot more usability and features. Maybe their appeal is to those who want to shoot primarily in portrait format, with a WLF.</p>

<p>I think that all <em>native</em> 645 SLRs (Mamiya, Pentax, Contax, Bronica, Hasselblad H) shoot landscape in their normal orientation. The vertical-travel focal plane shutter of the first three of these would appear to be an advantage in terms of avoiding shutter bounce/torque, especially when tripod mounted in landscape mode; the first curtain slams downwards into the ground-supported mass of the camera and tripod, whereas in a horizontal-travel shutter like the Pentax 67, it slams sideways, where there is less inertia. I guess this theory could be tested if the cameras were turned to portrait mode on the tripod!</p>

<p>Anyway, if the camera is tripod-mounted, there are a few convenient ways to turn it on its side while keeping its centre of gravity over the tripod; from the second tripod socket of the Pentax 645, to the various generations of ingenious camera-rotating-on-axis tripod attachments made by Mamiya, to 3rd party L-plates in the standard Arca quick-release dovetail fitting.</p>

<p>Finally, there are circumstances where one would use a native 645 camera but never need to turn it on its side: when shooting either the "superslide" film format, or the square format digital backs. Changing from my usual Kodak DCS645M back to an occasional film back on my Mamiya 645AFD, I sometimes have to remind myself that I do have to turn the camera to get portrait mode on 645 film!</p>

<p> </p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>there are circumstances where one would use a native 645 camera but never need to turn it on its side: when shooting either the "superslide" film format, or the square format digital backs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br /><br />I have been known to rotate a 6x6 square format folding camera through ninety degrees without realising what I am doing!</p>

[steve_mareno1]

<p>I share your pain Steve. On the other hand, I also enjoy getting 16 negs vs 12, so turning the camera is something that rewards me in the 'ol pocket book. I wondered what to do about this years ago. Should I make a mask that goes the "right" way? Should I shoot the Russian camera mentioned (that thought didn't go very far, having owned Russian cameras before)? Now I simply mask off the viewfinder of a 6x6 camera w/ tape if I want a more rectangular image, and do the same w/ 6x4.5 if I want square. There's still lots of negative left if you convert a 6x4.5 to a square in the darkroom or Photoshop.</p>

[jeff_livacich]

<p>Jim, <br /> The second tripod socket on the Pentax 645 allows the camera to remain directly over the tripod's vertical centerline for maximum stability, instead of being shifted off-center, which will make the setup less stable. It also allows the lens to remain centered on the subject.<br /> One very quick way to switch is to have one quick-release plate attached to the side and one to the bottom.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

I've never seen turning an MF (or 35 mm) camera on its side by tipping the tripod head as something problematic that needs a solution such as a tripod socket on the side.<br><br>The biggest problem with the rectangular format and 'classic' MF SLR cameras is that neither the waist level finder (which is the standard viewfinder on most) nor the 45 degree prism (the popular alternative) 'work' when the camera is turned on it's side: awkward viewing (from the side) combined with the reversal of sides in the waist level finder makes it an unpleasant experience.<br>So you need a 90 degree prism finder, which means you also have to raise the camera up to eye-level. Which does not necessarily provide the perpsective you are after (and it's easy to have to bend down and still see comfortably through a waist level finder or 45 degree prism, much less using a 90 degree prism) and is awkward when hand holding.<br><br>So cameras like the Pentax 645 and the Hasselblad H-series offer (almost) only one type of viewfinder: a 90 degree prism. Others, like the big Mamiya SLRs have rotating backs. Cameras like the small Mamiyas and Bronicas need their standard waist level finder changed for a 90 degree prism.<br>Rangefinders are eyelevel cameras anyway.<br><br>(The Hasselblad A12V magazine mentioned earlier is indeed rare, and has a collector's value, i.e. is too expensive. That, because it is a daft solution, which not many were ready to even try. It's easy enough to crop a 6x6 exposure to vertical 6x4.5, offering more choice than when the crop is done in-camera. Changing magazines to switch from horizontal to vertical format is silly, much more inconvenient than putting a 90 degree prism on the camera and flipping the camera when needed. And such an A12V magazine does not offer more economic use of film. So not many were sold, and the magazine was quickly discontinued again.)

[ivan_j._eberle1]

Re: the Pentax 645N and it's second tripod hole, I've got mine set up with Markins P67U Arca-style plate. With a QR clam like the Novoflex Q-base, it's a really quick operation to swap from horizontal to vertical.

Frankly, this camera is a terrific choice for handheld use and I can handhold it to silly slow speeds like 1/8s, so I find I don't use the tripod nearly as much as I expect to.

[jeff_livacich]

<p>Q.G.,<br>

To each his own. I definitely dislike tipping the tripod head for verticals. Weight will always be shifted off the tripod centerline, and destabilize it by that much. With large lenses it can be substantial, and spreading the tripod legs farther to compensate is not always possible. My favorite 3-way head is the Bogen/Manfrotto 3028. Its design allows it to be twisted in different ways which allows the camera to be much closer to the centerline when flipped on its side. I can center my smaller 35mm SLR's using it.</p>

<p>As to the viewing problem: you are correct, as it requires viewing an upside-down reversed image. But there is a simple way to make it possible to use a waist level finder in that situation. I do this frequently with my Bronica 645's and it means I can leave the prisms at home if I want to.<br>

Here is what I do:<br>

With the camera with WLF on its side, stand to the side of the camera so the focusing screen is facing you and you are facing it. So if the lens is pointing North, and the head is tilted left so the screen faces West, you are standing to the left of the camera, facing East. Hold a mirror so it is contacting the lowest edge of the WLF and is at about a 45 degree angle, reflecting the screen image upward. Looking down, you will see the image on the focusing screen right-side up and unreversed- the same as if you were looking through a prism.<br>

Some folks probably won't like standing to the side, but I find it to be no more trouble to turn my head to look directly at the subject than to have to look up from an eyepiece. <br>

I use a small makeup mirror which is just the right size, with its own little plastic pouch. I shamelessly wheedled it from a girlfriend.</p>

 

[michael_josefsson]

<p>The Mamiya 645:s are horizontal natively. The Fujis are not.</p>