Advice on MF cameras

[rajmohan.]

<p>Hi folks,<br>

I quite like using my recently acquired Yashica TLR on city streets (where I shoot a variety of subjects hand-held), but would like to take advantage of the benefits of MF when I go out into nature. I'm soon to embark on a week-long landscape photography workshop in California. So I'm debating whether to invest in a higher-end MF camera or system.<br>

The criteria I'm seeking for my somewhat eclectic range of photography are: reliability, relatively portable (to be carried around all day by an average-build chap), hand-holdable (I'm happy to use a tripod from time to time, but since I'm usually wandering all day on busy city streets, the ability to carry it around and to hand-hold is important).<br>

I'm relatively new to the forum, but I have read quite a bit here and on other fora about the various MF systems and their pros and cons. Based on my criteria, the Mamiya TLRs and RB/RZ, Pentax 67 etc are out (too heavy to carry around all day/not hand-holdable), and the options I have are high end TLRs (Rollei), Hasselblad, Mamiya 6 (or possibly 7), Fuji RFs, and Bronica RF645. I understand that we're talking about 3 very different types of camera (TLR vs SLR vs RF), and that they can all deliver great results. I should say that I'm comfortable (and like) using 35mm SLRs and RFs, so the type of camera doesn't faze me as much as the reliability/carry-ability/hand-hold-ability.<br>

The main question is whether I'd gain anything by jumping into one of these now, or whether I should just shoot with the Yashica TLR (including during the landscape workshop) and see how it goes before deciding on which direction I should take. A second question is whether shooting the YashicaMat on a tripod for landscapes is likely to give me excellent results, or whether it will prove a little lacking (the camera has been recently CLA'd and is in excellent condition). The final question: if I did go with the Yashica, should I purchase a cable release (if so, which type) or just work with the self timer on the camera? <br>

Sorry for the long-winded post to ask what are probably simple questions to MF experts.<br>

Thanks in advance for your advice/comments!<br>

Raj</p>

[jeff_schraeder1]

<p>Please understand that this is a subjective viewpoint. For wilderness I would go simple. A rangefinder that didn't need a battery to operate would be my choice. I use a Fuji 6x9 in these circumstances. In civilization (Paris) I use a Mamiya 7II. A tripod and a cable release are good things to have along.</p>

[AJG]

<p>I'd keep using the Yashica for now, and I would definitely get a cable release for tripod use. A later Rollei (Planar or Xenotar) would probably get you better negatives, but I wouldn't buy one until you were sure that a TLR is what you're comfortable with.</p>

[rajmohan.]

<p>Jeff and Andrew - thank you for your comments.<br>

Jeff - I have been strongly considering the Mamiya 6 as being a good compromise between size, portability and quality, but your point about not going into the wilderness with a battery-reliant camera is well taken! The Fuji 6x9 is a bit bulky, but may fit the bill! If I may ask, did you choose the Mamiya 7 over the Mamiya 6 because of its less advanced age or the 6x7 format? Thanks.<br>

Andrew - this is probably sage advice; use what I have until it is second nature. The reason for my search (apart from a small case of G.A.S.) is to give myself the best chance of getting high quality images from the workshop trip - it's with an instructor whose vision I admire, and while I freely acknowledge my photographic deficiencies, I don't want the gear to hold me back from reaching my potential.</p>

[CoryAmmerman]

<p>If you like the TLR form factor, I wouldn't be so quick to count out the Mamiya TLR's. I have a 'Mat and a C3. While the C3 is definitely larger and heavier, I wouldn't say the difference is all that dramatic. The later versions of the C220 and C330 are supposedly a good bit lighter than the C3, though I can't comment on that from personal experience. Given the price point of the C-series models, I would think you'd have an easier time selling the camera without taking a loss (as opposed to the higher priced options), should you decide you don't like it. There just aren't as many people as there once were that are willing to plunk down $1000+ on a film camera.</p><div></div>

[joseph_dickerson]

<p>Just a thought...if the landscape workshop is film based great, get a better MF camera. But if it's going to be digital based then shooting film will probably be a hinderance.<br>

Check with the instructor(s) and see which they'd prefer you to have, both may be an option. Many workshops will even provide a suggested gear list to help students decide what to bring.<br>

Again, if it's film based, and very few are today, then you're right to consider something more versatile than the Yashica.<br>

The instructor(s) will be happy to help you decide what's appropriate as it will help you have a better workshop experience.<br>

JD</p>

 

[craig_shearman1]

<p>If you're happy with your Yashicamat for handheld street shooting, it will produce even better results when it's anchored on a tripod and you have subject matter that sits still and lets you take your time to contemplate composition, exposure, etc. No need to rush out to buy a new camera. And a camera you are familiar is eaiser to use than a strange camera if your workshop is coming up soon.<br /><br />Joseph raises a very important point -- almost any photography class today is likely to be digital. Back in the day, workshops were done with film and would often provide overnight processing so you could judge your work. Highly unlikely to be the case today. If everyone else is shooting digital and you're shooting film, you're going to miss out on the critiques and feedback that are a key part of the experience.<br /><br />If you do want medium format film and want something more than your TLR but will want portability, look at the Mamiya 645 or Bronica ETR series. They are medium format SLRs but are in the 645 format, which makes them much more portable.<br /><br />Are you talking landscape as such, or more broadly nature photography? Read John Shaw's books on the subject, which were written at the end of the pre-digital era. He highly recommended 35mm -- it was smaller and lighter and cheaper than MF or LF, also cheaper to shoot in terms of film and processing. As a professional, he said he did not get paid any more for a picture shot in MF or LF than 35mm, and that 35mm met the needs of his magazine and book publishers, so no need for MF.</p>

[thomas_k.]

<p>Your well working Yashica is enough for a landscape workshop participation. Afterwards you can decide which way you want to go - but get used to the idea of using tripod :) and yes get a cable release - you will be able to shoot slower film and use smaller apertures - something that probably they will tell you to do at the workshop.</p>

[jeff_schraeder1]

<p>At the time I had plenty of money so I was just trying different formats. I like the 6x9 format. It is similar to 35mm but much bigger. The Mamiya 7II works much better for me in the city (Paris) because of the electronics. Trees and mountains rarely move, people do so you have to be quick.</p>

[ondebanks]

<p>Workshop trips are expensive, so you want to make the most of them. The only thing I'd question about taking your Yashica TLR on the workshop is whether you'll be limited by the fixed single focal length lens.</p>

<p>Now, probably the best single roll of film I ever shot, in terms of the number of printable "keepers", was a landscape/outdoors set shot with a Mamiya 645 1000s and 80/1.9 standard lens, over 20 years ago. It was the only lens I took with me on that trip, so I had to work with that limitation.</p>

<p>But having said that, even within the scenes captured on that roll, I can see additional photo framings that would have been as good or better, if I had a longer lens like my 150/3.5 with me as well. A shortish telephoto (1.5x to 2.5x the focal length of the 'standard' lens) is a sweet landscape lens - also a great 'street' lens!</p>

<p>And there are many expert practitioners of the wideangle lens in medium format landscapes too, of course.</p>

<p>So I'd want to bring at least a 3-lens kit with me on that sort of trip. To do so, while remaining portable and hand-holdable for your normal type of shooting, I think you should be looking at the Mamiya 6 and 7, and the various 645-format SLRs.</p>

<p> </p>

[nickc1]

<p>How long is it until your trip? - because you have a known camera now but will you have time to buy another outfit check it out under different conditions (hot cold etc) and get a number of results back to really trust the new purchase?</p>

<p>All of the suggestions made have advantages and drawbacks - but buying a new outfit that then fails on day 1 is your worst nightmare.</p>

<p>Having said that my suggestion, should you wish to change anyway, is that I use a Hasselblad 500C on a neck strap as a walk around camera and it works OK for me, but I have never seen another on a strap round someone's neck. The rumour mill suggests the 'blad needs regular servicing if you are a Pro, but as an amateur I have never used it intensively enough to find out if this is true or not. </p>

<p>Nick</p>

[BernardMiller]

<p>If you like your Yashica, and yet you're wanting to be able to use a range of lenses, I'd definitely consider the Mamiya C220/C330 family. They're really not that heavy at all, particularly when you factor in the lenses--even with the doubled lenses, they're still lighter than some comparable medium format SLR lenses.</p>

<p>For example, Here's a comparison between same/similar focal lengths for Hasselblad and Mamiya TLR:</p>

 

<ul>

<li>Zeiss 50/F4 CF 800g, Mamiya 55/F4.5 360g</li>

<li>Zeiss 60/F3.5 CF 860g, Mamiya 65/F3.5 340g</li>

<li>Zeiss 80/F2.8 CF 510g, Mamiya 80/F2.8 310g</li>

<li>Zeiss 180/F4.0 CF 1075g, Mamiya 180/F4.5 Super 640g</li>

</ul>

<p>(Sources: Graham Patterson's Mamiya TLR Summary, mir.com)</p>

<p>I would believe a Mamiya TLR body would probably weigh less than a Hasselblad body and back. I'm too lazy at the moment to look up <em>those</em> figures, however. The Mamiya lenses are also super compact--you can throw a body and three or four lenses in a fairly small bag, leaving loads of room for film, meter, etc.--and they are really, really cheap. Plus, you can focus much closer with a Mamiya TLR, if you're doing semi-macro shots in nature, especially if you use a tripod and a paramender. I did some really nice closeups of orchids one time with my TLR, a bit of flash, and the 65mm lens. And you can handhold/use a monopod at slower shutter speeds with the TLR, as you won't have to worry about mirror vibrations. Finally, as the Mamiya TLRs are very simple (especially the C220 versions, as they don't have the automatic shutter cocking mechanism) and quite well built, they tend to work pretty much forever.</p>

<p>All that being said, I <em>did</em> trade in my C330f and four lenses (55, 65, 80 and 180--plus a bit of cash, of course) on a Hasselblad system. I had acquired a Rolleiflex, and I decided I needed to keep only one TLR as I'm not a collector--if I'm not using it regularly, it has to go. Because I was able to get a Hasselblad kit (camera, two backs, two lenses), which I'd been lusting after, for fairly cheap (especially so when the dealer gave me a generous trade in allowance on the Mamiya kit, which was in good shape), I decided to go in that direction.</p>

<p>As I don't consider it a pain at all to carry around a 'Blad with one lens and a couple of backs in a small bag, I don't think you'd find a complete Mamiya TLR system to be heavy in any way. If the Zeiss lenses are indeed better than the Mamiya lenses, you'll be hard pressed to see it--you'll probably be well happy indeed with the results from the TLR, so if the Hasselblad lenses are actually better, you'd probably be in ecstasy with them. As long as you're prepared to pay the price for them.</p>

<p>Overall, if you're looking for great quality, small size/weight, and especially if you are on a budget, the Mamiya TLR system offers some of the best bang-for-buck--maybe, with its versatility, reliability and image quality, the very best in that department--in medium format. I'd bet with careful shopping, you could get a body and three-lens kit, along with some other handy accessories, for less than $600, maybe even cheaper. Leaving more cash for film and processing!</p>

<p>Mamiya TLRs also offer some additional advantages over their more expensive rivals. (I won't comment on systems I haven't used, or am not at least pretty familiar with.) I also have an RZ67 (and used to own an RB67), and you're right, it's big, heavy and not fun to carry around on long hikes. Not only is the Mamiya TLR lighter than the 'Blad and doesn't have mirror slap to worry about, Hasselblads have a tendency to be a bit temperamental--they can jam, meaning you might have to carry around the special tool for fixing this problem, and I've got a couple of backs that will do nasty things to film spacing and are prone to scratching the film if you don't watch them. (A service will fix the first of those, when I get around to/can afford it, but the scratch issue I have discovered is caused by a slight design flaw in the backs.) The Mamiya 7 lenses are legendarily good, but they don't focus as close, they can be quite expensive--they're certainly pricier by far than Mamiya TLR lenses--and the camera itself can also be a bit fragile in the field because it's made considerably of plastic. And if your rangefinder is out of whack or out of agreement with a lens (a not uncommon problem with rangefinder cameras in general), you'd probably be totally unaware of this until far too late.</p>

<p>Good luck! Several folks have offered really good advice above, I hope that mine is at least somewhat useful in helping you decide what to do.</p>

<p> </p>

[rajmohan.]

<p>Hello everyone,<br />Sorry I haven't responded to all of your helpful suggestions - work has intervened!!<br>

Cory - I managed to have a quick look and briefly held a Mamiya C220 - it actually felt quite good in my hands. I may move to this after the YashicaMat, but given space restrictions in our apartment, 2 TLRs might be one too many!<br>

Joseph - for film, the instructor told me to skip MF altogether and go to large format! He will be shooting a 4x5 (along with a Canon G camera for digital color). This is a little beyond me at this point. While I find LF fascinating and would like to try it someday, it's probably not a great idea to take along equipment that is not very familiar to me. (I can, of course pick the instructors brain about LF as he works!!)<br>

Craig - your advice is spot on. I will probably end up taking the TLR or perhaps my 645 rangefinder as the MF film options, along with my digital 35mm gear. I have read John Shaw's books, and you're right, a decent DSLR plus high quality lenses may well perform over and above my ability to use them to their full potential!<br>

Thomas - given my back injury of a year ago, I'm always conscious of how much I carry around (one reason why I prefer to shoot hand-held is to avoid carrying a tripod), hence my choosiness about the gear to take with me. But you're absolutely right - shooting landscapes without a tripod, small apertures and filters is foolhardy. So the tripod will accompany me!<br>

Ray - I almost always shoot primes on my 35mm cameras, so I'm familiar with the limitations (and sometime frustrations) of fixed lenses. I will have a set of primes and zooms to go with my DSLR, so I don't think the fixed lens on the TLR will be limiting - I'll just have to be selective in what I can use it for. Buying a MF system with 3 lenses is unfortunately beyond my wife's budgetary tolerance, not to mention having to carry these along with the lenses for the DSLR on my dodgy back!<br>

Nick - you make an excellent point; fumbling around with gear that you don't know when time and opportunities are limited is not a good idea at all. I have 10 weeks until the trip, so enough time to get comfortable with a new system (it usually takes me about 4-6 weeks of fairly regular shooting to get comfy with new gear).<br />Bernard - Cory had a similar suggestion. Your detailed information on the Mamiya TLR and Hasselblad is very helpful - I'll definitely consider the former (for the price!) and the latter (for how great it feels to use).<br>

To sum up - my thanks to all of you for your insight and advice; it has been most helpful. After considering your input and my current gear, I think I'll attend the workshop with my digital gear, and for MF, either the Yashica TLR or the 645 rangefinder - this will make a reasonably portable set that I'm very comfortable using. After the workshop, when time is more plentiful, I might delve into the Mamiya or Hasselblad systems and see if they work for me going forward. Thanks again!!<br>

Raj :)</p>

[mag_miksch]

<p>Here is another Mamiya TLR voter, a 330s looks big but isnt heavy and as mentioned above, the lenses are pretty lightweighted and compact, a complete set with some lenses fits into a small bag.</p>