Which MF System For Me?

[mike_earussi1]

<p>Chip, any and all of the cameras mentioned above would work fine and fit your budget. The key is you, your style of photography, whether you prefer handholding or tripod, whether weight and bulk is important or not, whether you like to shoot fast or are more contemplative, etc.</p>

<p>For light weight and fast shooting the Pentax 645 is all around the best with built-in meter and prism. The other 645s are more versatile with their interchangeable backs and viewfinders, but at the expense of increased weight and bulk.</p>

<p>For the ultimate in light weight a TLR like a Mamiya is best (Rolleis are even better but out of your price range).</p>

<p>For 6x7 handheld the Pentax 6x7 wins.</p>

<p>For 6x7 on a tripod the RB/RZ systems with their built-in bellows are great for studio and macro work.</p>

<p>For 6x9 the Fuji fixed lens cameras are about the best around, but they are rangefinders. </p>

<p>Biggest bang for the buck is the Koni-Omega, but is also a rangefinder.</p>

<p>And the cheapest MF cameras of all are any of the old 1950s 6x9 folders with their coated 3 element lenses and zone focusing. I picked up one for $30 and at f11 the results were surprisingly good.</p>

<p>So have fun deciding.</p>

[Jochen_S]

<p>I grabbed 6x6 stuff back in the days - Mamiya C330, C33, 4 lenses a barely ever used prism finder and a Pentacon with just 120mm for lower light or close ups with bellows and an Agfa folder.<br>

I think you get used to turning WLF cameras during a week or such. The important thing is to practise at home on your own before you look too clumsy in front of people. - When I flipped up the LCD of my Fuji I noticed I needed a few moments to move it according to the displayed picture - I was too drilled to WLFs.<br>

I can't contribute much about square cameras. I feel too tall to want eye level finders and lifting MF cameras that high requires muscles... <br />I shot home processed BW most of the time. So a half sloppy framing style could be compensated with cropping. - Most of my negs ended on uncropped 8x10 paper, so maybe the saying "6x4.5 & 6X6 are the same, besides you 'll pay less for film when you rotate your camera once in a while" is true. - I don't care enough to lust after something else (in MF). <br>

You haven't stated what you are planning to burn with the new camera. - I was usually content with color in 35mm but for BW especially on fast film the 6x6 gear seemed essential. - If you are into BW: reconsider your attitude towards SLRs. Focusing through color filters gets annoying, at least I never liked it. A field where TLRs shine IMHO. - probably the same about softeners. - I bought a few but barely used them at all. - I don't seriously recommend fixed standard lens TLRs; they seem too limiting and limited for a zooms or 35mm kit spoiled modern shooter, to me their 35mm conversion kits Rolleikin & such seemed most tempting but as a fun toy / project back in pre-serious digital days.<br>

Upon the formats discussion: since you have 35mm: take a well exposed neg on fastest film and figure out what the bearable (for landscape shot with details or groups) enlargement ratio is in your eyes. - do the math from there on... I am fine with a 5x enlargement from pushed TMY - that means a 8x10" print with a wee bit of cropping (from the 6cm side) are you planning to print bigger? - Then consider shooting bigger or slower film. </p>

[flavio_egoavil]

<p>Another vote here for the Mamiya RB67, my favorite camera ever (over the Nikon F, Nikon F3, Nikkormat FT2, Rollei 35, Rolleicord, Mamiya C330, Canon 5D, Canon A-1, Olympus Pen S, Olympus OM-1, OM-2, Yashica Electro 35, and Kodak Retina IIIc.)</p>

<p>Although the Kodak comes close.</p>

[deanmeeks]

<p>I also recommend a good TLR such as the Mamiya C220/C330 models I have two C220s. One cost $165.00 with 2.8 blue dot lens, the other was $100.00 with 135mm lens. Both are in beautiful shape. The pictures are far superior to 35mm which I still use on occasion. Background bokeh is very very nice.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>http://www.kievaholic.com/ for some hard, but sympathetic, talk on some of the Soviet MF cameras.<br /> I have the Pentacon 6TL and a terrific set of Zeiss lenses for it, with a prism finder. I quite like it, and it works well once you get the secret handshake necessary to load it correctly.<br /> However, I would not willingly be the only photographer of record with these Communist cameras at some major event. You will also notice that many important Soviet photographers got Western equipment to use.</p>

<p>Similarly, my admittedly anecdotal research on many Japanese 6cm± SLRs has been discouraging. People who have used many of these, even sold them when they were new, have often indicated that if you want a Hasselblad-quality camera, there is little substitute for actually getting a Hasselblad.</p>

<p>TLRs and rangefinders, on the other hand, are very rugged, and seem to work still no matter who made them or where they were made. My East German Weltaflex works well, as does my Zeiss Ikoflex. There are scores of good Japanese ones, I am told. Just stay away from things that use no-longer-made films like 620, though there are awkward ways around the problems.<br /> For a medium-format RF camera, I really like my 6x7 Rapid Omega 100. For action shooting with 6cm film, it is wonderful. Now if it were only easier to find 220 film.</p>

[baisao]

<p>There's a lot of great advice that's been provided, especially from Gary and JDM. As you can tell, there's no such thing as a perfect camera. There are limitations to every system.</p>

<p>Some medium format systems were designed, primarily, to be used on a tripod in a studio. Without naming names, these tend to be the heavier/larger cameras. The RB/RZ67 are great cameras with stellar lenses, but you can read between the lines. The Mamiya C330 has interchangeable lenses but is heavy. I've seen great photos from the Mamiya C330 but after playing with one I decided it would be too heavy to carry in the field (albeit, I typically carry 2-3 cameras at a time).</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Regarding aspect ratio, I think I would prefer to avoid square</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I thought the same thing but it's been a revelation to shoot square. It's also worth noting that 6x7 is virtually square. It kind of bugged me at first but allowed me to ease into 6x6. Here's a recent thread on how odd 6x7 is: <a href="/medium-format-photography-forum/00cnSx">6x7 is weird isn't it?</a>. Some folks disagree of course.</p>

<p>Size matters: obviously, a larger negative matters but the size of the camera matters also. You're more likely to bring with you a camera of reasonable size and weight. This is why I advocate TLRs and the Mamiya 6/7. It's good to make sure you are comfortable with these camera sizes before going bigger. Well, that's always been by approach.</p>

 

[jose_angel]

<p>Some square vs 6x7 opinions <a href="/medium-format-photography-forum/00cdE7">here</a>.</p>

[donbright]

<p>I can only recommend a camera system that has been un-waivering, consistent, durable, easy to use, great glass, within the light category, best meter, Auto AE, manual, exposure comp, exposure lock, the Pentax 67II....for landscapes? All around best in medium format IMO. I've been hearing of the 6X7 format being close to a square, so why not go with the square, well, 6X7 is not square, and provides enough guide for versatile composing. 6X7 is perfect. Rangefinders are light, but for the landscape, not enough control.</p>

[Aoresteen]

<p>I have used medium format since 1972. I currently use a Mamiya 645 1000s, Hasselblad 2000FC/M, Hasselblad 500C, Rollie 2.8 TLR, and a 6x9 view camera. I just returned from a two week trip to Scotland and Ireland and I took my Mamiya 645 1000s with 35mm, 55mm, and 150mm lenses (21mm, 35mm, & 85mm 35mm equivalents).</p>

<p>I took both the waist level finder and the plain prism finders. The Mamiya kit weighs significantly less than what my Hassleblad kits weigh. I would have perfered talking my 6x9 view but I could not handle the weight travling through airports and my companions would not have the patience that a view camera requiers. Also the car was fully packed as is and there was no room for a tripod.</p>

<p>The Mamiya optics are superb. I have used the Mamiya 645 1000s since 1977 and I have had 3 bodies. I bought my current one from KEH about 10 years ago. Buy one and be done with it!</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>Granted the C330 is heavy but that's what we used to carry around at one of the first newspapers I worked for. And the one I own I bought from a wedding photographer who carried it around every weekend. <br /><br />As for square... shooting a square camera doesn't mean you're necessarily shooting square pictures. It was common practice on 6x6 cameras to use thin graphic arts tape to mark off 8x10 proportions on the ground glass. That made it easier to compose for the finished size of the prints. Few people sold square prints. Although Monte Zucker told the story of selling square prints and then making extra money by selling square frames that were otherwise hard to find -- :)</p>

[john_photos]

<p>Shoot a Bronica GS-1 currently. Compact system for a 6x7 SLR. Owned a Mamiya 7 for many years for handheld work but while the optics were stupendous I just had to many problems with parallax and framing. The Bronica is nice but after reading your thread I would seriously consider 645 SLR if I were you. I still occasionally shoot my 645 ETRSi on long hikes. If you are just starting out in medium format it might be wise to start with the smaller negative. Using fine grained film there is much you can do with the 645 format if you scan with a high end scanner (Nikon 9000/imacon or Drum scan). Unless you are printing very large I think 645 is a great format personally. Remember, the jump from 35mm to 645 is quite large and greater incrementally in my view than going from 645 to 6x7. If you read thru the forums you will find the vast majority of posts by professionals who used to use medium format film cameras will agree with me regarding this. <br>

6x7 SLR's are awfully large. Consider whether you will have the camera with you when inspiration hits. Some photographers do not care. They will lug around a giant Mamiya RZ and think nothing of it. For some types of photography I understand why. However, if you leave the camera at home then having the larger negative is of no consequence. <br>

The mamiya 645pro series look like great cameras though I have no experience with any Mamiya SLR I did consider one back in the 90's but chose Bronica without regrets. Preferred leaf shutters so went with the ETRSI and have had no regrets as the system has been very very reliable.<br>

Hope this helps.</p>

 

[john_photos]

<p>Chip,<br>

My bad for not carefully reading one of your response post that says you prefer to work handheld.<br>

If you truly prefer to work handheld then purchase a Medium Format rangefinder and deal with the disadvantages. All medium format SLR's are not ideal for handheld work in my opinion. Mamiya 6 or 7 OR Fuji rangefinders OR Bronica RF645 OR perhaps Koni omega/Mamiya Press cameras are far superior in the sharpness department if your intent is handheld work. They all suck on a tripod in my opinion but handheld these cameras are FAR superior to any medium format SLR. Chose accordingly if you are committed to handheld work. </p>

 

[chip_chipowski]

<p>Thanks to all for the suggestions. This really helps. I have come to the following conclusion: how could I limit myself to just one MF camera?! <br>

Equipped with your feedback, I am going to patiently watch my classifieds for a good bargain. That might actually make the decision easier ;) Lots of good options without a built in meter - I guess I'll have to pick one up. I think I am leaning Mamiya TLR or RB67 at this point. Thanks everybody. </p>

[greg_campbell1]

Chip, what sort of photography do you have in mind?

<br><br>

I've got a square Bronica that is a fine camera, but using it hand-held is not always such an easy thing. Shooting through the waist-level viewfinder is natural enough, once you adapt to the reversed image, but any attempt to raise and operate the camera above gut-level immediately becomes problematic. Shooting through a prism is more flexible, but I find the square box shape awkward to grip and handle in this position. Adding a grip/winder fixes the issue, but adds weight and cost. If you're thinking landscape or street shooting, a brick like the Pentax SLR might be preferable to the Hassy/Bronica box system. Or consider a rangefinder (they do tend to be more $$)

<br><br>

Suggest you have a long think about the film format. While there's not a lot of size difference between a 6x6 and 6x7 camera, there will be some weight penalty. FWIW, I find shooting a 6x6 to be quite different from the standard rectangular format. As such, it's a refreshing change.

<br><br>

Here's a handy rundown of many MF systems:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/FrameWork/Product_Resources/SourceBookProPhoto/Section01MediumFormat.pdf

<br><br>

I have a bunch of Bronica catalogs and user's guides that I can post to if you're interested.

[iangillett]

<p>Greg,<br>

Many thanks for the link to the B&H pages, a fascinating source of information. Do you know the year of publication?<br>

Best Wishes</p>

<p>Ian</p>