Is medium format 'worth it' if you don't have a darkroom for an amateur?

[matthew_peretz1]

I'm struggling with the idea of whether or not MF is 'worth it' in

terms of cost/ease of having film processed printed versus a top

quality 35mm outfit.

 

I'm trying to decide between a 35mm rangefinder like the M6 TTL and

something like a Mamiya 7 or Bronica RF645.

 

I dont' have the time in my life right now to have a darkroom - but I

still love to make gorgeous pictures of all sorts of subjects ranging

from portraits (mostly full body/kids) to 'outdoor abstract' stuff

like pieces of wood, etc. to landscapes.

 

Any ideas for me - I don't plan to use the camera as my 'primary'

camera - I have my Minolta DiMage 7 for that - with which, and I

hesitate to add this here, I have actually made a beautiful 20x30

photo from of my daughter (sure - it's a bit soft but the colors are

gorgeous and the detail is there and it isn't 'flat' in the way some

digital images are).

 

I want to use the film camera for more 'artistic' stuff.

 

 

Thanks to all in advance! This is a big struggle for me - I have

about $1,100 to spend and have been struggling with this for too

long.

 

By the way - I have a Leica M6 TTL body that I would need to sell to

get this 'OTHER' cam - but that shouldn't be a problem on that

auction site.

[e_m3]

There's no comparison between 35mm and MF for large prints. MF wins hands down. If you only plan on printing 5-10 of your very best pictures each year it is worth it.

 

I shoot only chromes. About 3-6 of these a year I have turned into prints. I have my chromes drum scanned. I work on them in Photoshop then print to either a Lightjet or high end inkjet printer. If you keep your number of prints low (and print only the best ones) MF isn't that expensive.

[godfrey]

If you're planning to use the camera for that "special" few large prints, yes, you'll do much much better with nearly any medium format camera than with even the most expensive 35mm.

 

Like you, I use a 5Mpixel digital camera for the majority of my shooting these days ... I use the Sony F707. I sold my Leica M kit for a Hasselblad 903SWC and added a 500CM + 80mm to the kit a little later. The difference in image quality for large prints makes me extremely satisfied I did so. For home use, I scan the negatives with an Epson 2450 flatbed scanner and print to 13x19" using an Epson 1270; my 'darkroom' is Photoshop. Even doing that, the difference in print quality from 35mm film to a cropped 6x6cm is well worth it.

 

If the eye-level rangefinder type camera is what you're looking for, both the Mamiya 7 and the Bronica RF645 would be perfect. I personally would prefer the latter ... I like its size and feel better and find that 645 format is more than enough for my needs. It's "handy" much the way a 35mm camera is, where 6x7 format cameras always begin to feel a bit unwieldy to me. The RF645 and its lenses are much less expensive as well.

 

Godfrey

[john_boley]

I've been a 35mm guy for years and still use it primarily. HOWEVER, about 6 months ago I bought a 40 year old Yashica C with the Yashicor lense off ebay for $46.00 (shipping and all). I wish I could tell you that my Canon Elan 7, 35mm outfit outperforms this antique dinosaur, but it doesn't! In fact, for outdoor portraiture and landscapes, the Yashica wins hands down. The detail and sharpness captured by the large negative makes quality prints every time! I develop and print my own B & W, so that's what I shoot most of the time. I believe that whatever you have to spend for developing and printing medium format will be money well spent. You'll be satisfied when you see the difference.

[john_morris4]

The Bronica RF645 is certainly tempting, with the current rebate. The rebate seems to be pushing the used prices down, too: I just bought the whole RF645 kit (body, 60mm f/4 lens, caps, hood, strap, boxes) from KEH, in "like new minus" condition, for about $1000.

 

So far (about a week of casual use), I agree with Mike Johnston and Godfrey about this camera: once you get past the obvious shortcomings (no long lenses, the usual issues with rangefinder cameras (no close focus, imprecise framing)), it's a really nice camera. It's bigger than a Leica or small manual 35mm SLR, but not much. And it feels really solid.

 

Most important for me, it's much more useable (for me) than the TLR or 6x6 folder (an Isolette) that I have been using for medium format. I personally like using a rangefinder camera, so it feels good. The finder is bright, focus is fast and sure, and the automatic exposure is even nice. One thing I like about the auto exposure: to lock the exposure, you push an exposure lock button, which locks the exposure for several minutes, if you like. The nice touch is that after you have locked exposure, you can turn the aperture ring, and the shutter speed is adjusted to keep the same exposure.

 

For your "outdoor abstract" work, you may prefer an SLR, though, for the more precise framing and closer focus abilities. Maybe the Mamiya 645E kit (body, fixed prism viewer, film holder, and 80mm f/2.8 lens) for $700 would be interesting.

[brian_c._miller]

Photo labs all over will develop and print the film. Either they develop it themselves or else they send it off to be developed. The only reason I started developing my own film was because I started using some more esoteric film emulsions.<br>

<br>

The difference between formats is absolutely astounding. Get the camera with the biggest film area.<br>

<br>

I myself went from a point&shoot to a Pentax 6x7. A few years ago I thought about buying a nice 35mm camera. My conversation with the salesman went like this:<br>

Me: "I'm thinking about a Leica."<br>

Him: "Ok. What camera do you have now?"<br>

Me: "Pentax."<br>

Him: "OK, you're gonna love the Leica. Far sharper and much better contrast."<br>

Me: "6x7."<br>

Him: "Forget it. You're already there with medium format."<br>

[matthew_peretz1]

Hey - you folks have been really nice in answering me and I just wanted to thank you so far! I bought a Bronica RF645 kit just now.

[john_morris4]

Good, Matthew. More people should buy the Bronica. Many more people.

 

In fact, so many more people should buy that poor neglected little Bronica that Tamron will decide that they should sell a 35mm lens for it.

[trooper]

You'll like it, Michael....Fast, accurate, with gratifying build quality and first-rate optics.

[chip l.]

There is a differnce in images from MF negs vs. 35mm when you get into larger prints sizes (for me it was 11x14 or larger). One way to see for yourself is to rent a MF and see what you think. They are larger, heavier, and lenses generally slower. You may also wantto consider getting a MF folding camera. A recently CLA'd one will run you around $150 to $250; and would be a great way to see if MF is for you.

[ken_chi]

Tonality.

[the tightwad]

Mate, I'm what they call a "bottom feeder" in that I love old working

cameras. I don't care one fig about fancy names only what works and that includes MF cameras. For your budget you can buy a good Mamiya or

Yashica TLR some lens and still shoot MF with money left over for other things in your life. I've never worried or missed a shot with any of my "Old Iron" yet.

[werner boeckelen]

Matthew,

 

like you I changed to digital as my 'primary' camera. The impression, that still keeps me with my MF are Slides. Try to find s.b, who can show you some MF-Slides. I guarantee you, you will forget any 35mm Slide, you will forget any Beamer. That is a reason for me, without MF-Darkroom to MF-being worth.

 

Werner

[h._p.]

>>like you I changed to digital as my 'primary' camera<<

 

This is one of those things I'm uncomfortable with. I'm sure a lot of the people who frequent this forum take really good shots that they'll want to look at again and again and I fear that they'll be disappointed in the future.

 

The trouble with digital is that I wonder just how long lived it's going to turn out to be. With film, you've got something you can hold up to the light. With digital, it's all locked up on the media and there's no guarantee the technology will be around in ten years to read it.

 

I'm a working programmer and I've seen a lot of data go missing over the years simply because the technology's changed. I've also been a working photographer and I've got negs going back thirty five years. I just have this suspicion that I'll still have the negs in twenty years time but I might not have the digital files.

 

I'd rather like some way to raster the image down onto film - then I'd have the best of both worlds.

 

Best of luck with the 645!

[werner boeckelen]

>>> With digital, it's all locked up on the media and there's no guarantee the technology will be around in ten years to read it.

 

Harvey, I agree with you, that there are constraints with digital. I hope you are aware of the big nuisance of film as well. Think about:

 

+ Fire, flood, theft (esp. in these days!) - as I can now easily copy my whole picture-library on some DVD's and bring those copies outside of my house, I can lean back and feel save.

 

+ organization - I always felt bored to write down time and date, exposure information, locations and then to keep up with your picture organization, or even worse to send s.b. a copy - it's an awful job, this alone is worth to leave film only for time to time use. Now it's an easy job, really to quickly find or copy s.th.- I agree that this is my fault, but my skills are more of a photographer than a inventory organizer.

 

+ Scratches, dust, color-fading, closed eyes in the decisive moment, lost or/and ruined films, time you spend to get things developed.

 

I still love MF, no doubt, on the other hand I am really happy with the faciltation, digital brought to my work of pictures. If you don't trust Digital, why not simply get the most important pictures back on film!

[andreas_carl]

You don't need a darkroom (although it is nice to have one for black&white work!). I recommend Fuji GSW 690, use slide film and scan on the Epson 3200. This will fit with the digital work flow you already have!

[andreas_carl]

The Bronica RF 645 is very nice indeed, I have one with the full set of lenses (45, 65, 135) and am very happy with it. The image of the GSW is twice the size, but the Bronica is much more flexible.... arrggh, choices....