Leica vs. Medium Format

[squareframe]

Howard,

 

you have been around the block, maybe more than once. this is the point in your life and photographic journey, where you must *feel* the format. close you eyes, and ask yourself, how do I see? how do I see the light manifested before me? for me, choosing the 6x6 format of my Hasselblad was a sea change. kaboom ... there was a resonance, and I could feel the latent image forming on my square canvas.

 

Hasselblad's are *not* for everyone. in fact, the more I use my 503CW the greater awareness I gain of its freakish nature. really .. so much room for error. however .. each time I twist that Zeiss lens into focus, and the photons collect on my retina and I see my world snap into focus ... click, magic happens, and I remember why I journeyed down this path.

 

you should care Howard, 6x6, 645 ... you should, at this point, have passionate convictions, and move towards what pulls you.

[Rob F.]

Howard: I shoot with both. I use Leica M2 & M6, + Hasselblad. I like what I get with both. The Hasselblad: for black & white, serious prints. Leica: for color slides & black & white too. And for travel. I'm on my way to New York for recreation. Going with me: Leica M6, with 21mm through 90mm. Staying home: Hasselblad. Leica has been my companion through life for 50 years. Hasselblad: while in New York, I'll be looking for a 100mm f/3.5. I think I'm going to like that lens. Get my point? It may not be either/or. You may need both.

 

Regards,

Why not give the Fuji, point and shoot medium format cameras a consideration? Then stay with the Leica too. Only draw-back with both

IMHO is lack of lens length.

 

best wishes

 

~dodge

[richard baznik]

Howard:

 

I've been shooting Leica for 45 years (IIf, M3, and M6), and MF as well for the past eight years (now using a Bronica GS-1 system). I consider the image quality produced by each to be superb, but I use them for very different purposes.

 

The Leica system goes with me anywhere I travel, even if it's only around town, and it's perfect for "grab" shots and for tracking fleet grandchildren, but I've used it as well for informal portraits and landscapes. Light (relatively), small, quiet, sharp and fast glass, and incredibly well built.

 

The GS-1 is a set-up camera with some walk-around potential, and it gets used for more formal portraits, landscapes and cityscapes, and for macro work (with tubes). It only goes with me on trips that I've carefully planned for this purpose -- usually ones where I can expect to be able to use a tripod for about 50% of the shots. Great image size (I usually shoot 6x6 or 6x7), good flexibility, wonderful framing, and great lenses.

 

I wouldn't give up either one. OTOH, I haven't touched my N***n system (as it's referred to on the LUG) for about two years.

[jeff_drew4]

Leica! for travel!

MF is fine, but in low light, no-flash places, Leica will rule! Are we shooting slides? Leica lens + Leica projector + Kodachrome = "Nice shot!" Projecting MF slides are grand but check out your investment and constant weight load. BTW: your post mentions "system for growth" which eliminates most all MFRF choices and directs you to "SLR".

Besides, in 20 years, your Leica outfit will still be "current".

[roger krueger]

I'm at the less expensive end of the spectrum, but for me, a Mamiya Press was a huge inprovement over my manual-focus Minoltas. Then I found that even a humble Minolta Hi-matic looked better than the SLRs when handheld. My Hi-matic and my Press give great results at 1/15; my SLR looks horrid! Even at 1/60th the lack of mirror/shutter jarring makes a huge difference. To me, if you're going to handhold, a rangefinder is the only way to go, preferably one with a leaf shutter. There is no such current camera in 35mm, but the Mamiya 7 is a great choice if you can afford it. To me the biggest advantage of MF is that you can be a little sloppy with the composition in the heat of the moment, and then make carefully considered cropping decisions later.

[mr._kenny]

hey howard,

 

in medium format, the focus is on complete systems. rarely do you run across someone with 2 or 3 systems. you should find a format with versatility, more than any single feature.

i have a rollei 6008i. i recommend it as a good compliment to your leica (it is a good compliment to my g2.)

 

i find that for travel it sucks, it's too heavy. but for practical camera image making, it can't be beat. the rollei has just about everything your leica doesn't have:

 

* auto exposure via aperture or shutter priority with exposure lock

* spot metering or matrix integration (hence the term integral)

* easiest loading and removable backs with built-in dark slides

* ttl flash

* the grip! easiest handheld MF, bar none (i've used the contax 645, too)

* nice lenses from zeiss and schneider, all fully synced (leaf shutters), 1/3 stop apeture control

 

the cost and lack of rentalbility and repair suck though. i take it you aren't a pro; if you were you would be best off with a hassy or a mamiya, if only cuz if they die on you you can get it fixed pronto. professionals need to make money, so that's why they use those. i don't like either system, so i didn't buy them.

i'm not, so it's not so important. don't blame the camera, blame the importers. things are supposedly going to get better.

 

i will say that while the rollei is more of an investment, it has been worth it. it seems weird to recommend an electronic camera to a leica user, but hey i will.

 

good luck,

 

kenny

[bill_henick]

Hi Howard. I have an M6 and enjoy using it. I think there is a certain quality with Leica glass ( that disappears with significant enlargement). Bottom line; if it is not going to be enlarged, 35mm is easier. I also think that the use of an m6 has made me a better photographer. There is a learning curve with the m6- it took me about a year to get comfortable with it. There is a certain quality that I lose when enlarging to 8x10 and larger, especially in b&w that is not lost with the larger negative. I do appreciate the technological abilities of the 6008i- which I have been using for several years, but if 645 vs. 6x6 makes no difference to you, I would get the Contax. Fill flash works better, more frames to the roll, for a given focal length most of the Contax lenses are 1 stop faster, and AUTOFOCUS! Also, the prices of the Zeiss and Schneider lenses for Rollei are quite impressive. Good Luck.

[howard_b]

I am extremely grateful for the kind advice, pointed questions,

and recommendations.

 

I've determined that most MF cameras are simply too heavy for

me to lift and hold near my face for any extended period. My hand

muscles become tired, or stressed. So that rules out the likes of

the Mamiya 645 series, and its kin.

 

To my great surprise, I like "waist level" Hasselblad finder. But I

don't believe that holding the camera to my chest is any

reasonable substitute for using a tripod-- and, sadly, I'm not

going to carry a tripod when traveling. Perhaps a monopod. That

alone probably keeps me in 35mm?

 

I've not yet tried the new Contax 645, but I have high hopes for its

waist level finder, and for its automation.

 

In stores, Mamiya 7II feels a bit heavy. I'm also concerned about

the limitations of a system whose fastest available stop is f/4.

 

How bad is the 120 processing/finishing situation? As bad as

the posts suggest? You're scaring me...

 

And you're un-scaring me about Leica focusing. Sounds like I

can get used to the rangefinder system.

 

Again, thank you, one and all, for helping me. Best wishes for a

safe, happy, healthy new year.

[jeff_drew4]

Howard,

If you try a Fuji RFMF, you will experience a "Leica" feel in a MF. Hefting my Hassie and a tripod was a hassle, and I found travelling with the "system" tied me down. I continue to use TLRs and Fuji GW670 as hand-holdable MF travel outfits, and have lost the desire to haul any MF SLR. That said, I just became the proud daddy of a Voigtlander Bessa outfit! I never could afford Leica, and this gets me closer to the experience. Wow! I load the Bessa R with K64 or E100VS and I'm in love, again! My Domke travel bag just got cleaned out and refitted! BessaR + 3 lenses + Fuji GW670 + meter + a few filters and a brick of film! No tripod, no shoulder sag, no 2nd & 3rd bag of stuff I gotta have along too! If travel is your passion, any MF chrome will blow away 35mm, but seriously ask yourself is it worth all the extra bucks and body commitment to haul it?

[don_maldon]

I had a complete Hassy system (40/80/180 mm) and sold the entire kit after returning for a 2 week trip to Fiji. Wonderful images were captured but at the expense of weight. I remember hiking up to a hilltop to photograph a flowering tree which only grows on the island. Tired after the hike, the flower was a disapointing one-inch white bud.. no pic taken. I purchase an F5 with lenses from 20 mm to 500mm and kept this for about a year. Honestly, after a year, I still didn't know how to make all the bells/whistels sound! Again the weight was breaking my back. Yes I didn't have to take all the lenses, but what the heck, I had them so why not!

I now have 2 leicas 0.85 and 0.58. The 0.85 has the APO 90f2 attached and the 0.58 has the 35f2APO. The 50mm sits in my POCKET until needed. This kit weight less than any other kit I've had, much less, and I disagree with those who state the their isn't a differance between Leica glass and Nikon...their is a certain softness in transition from focus to out-of-focus. Capturing images is usually by avail light and most people just don't pay attention. Yes their is a differance between 35mm and MF ... no argument, but their is ALWAYS a trade off. BTW, for those times when I need a large image (landscapes) I use my MF Noblex but their is no way I can remain in the background...it always draws a crowd. As far as the Leica glass is concerned, it is the ONLY 35mm glass which I have seen that delivers the "pop" that one sees with MF. Contax was good but Leica is better. Suggest you rent before making such a purchase.

[mark_eban]

It is all about horses for courses:

 

Minox 35mm to carry about in the briefcase.

Leica for low light (hence I only bother with the 35 f1.4, 50 f1 and 75 1.4 and cant remember the last time I stopped them down.)

Hasselblad with a tripod or bright sunshine if one doesnt have to walk far.

Mamiya 7 for hiking.

Easy isn't it!:)

 

However the real problem is that some lenses just look different in the final print. Most leica lenses in my experience look different to 35mm slr lenses; however the zeiss 85mm f2.8 lens for the contax or rolleiflex in 35mm is better than anything; for soft focus portraits the 47mm lsm ektar cannot be duplicated;the distagon on the rolleiwide looks different (and better) than the hasselblad or Mamiya lenses; the 80mm planar on the Linhof press looks so different to anything the mamiya 7 can produce that people can pick it out of a stack of 10x8s; the 47mm super angulon on the plaubel pro-shift (completely parallel and rigid) beats any other wide 6x9 by a long long way; for macro what can compete with the look of the 90-180mm flat field vivitar or the 135mm makro for the hasselblad? Life is compromise - after all even if one owned everything think how much time you would take deciding what to use!