Medium Format newbie

[mike walden]

Hi. I have just ordered my first medium format camera. Knowing

absolutely NOTHING about this format, I have read as many of the

posts as I can on this, and I am still in question about one thing

as of now. Does all medium format cameras, say a 6x6, use the same

120 film? If not, how will I know what film to buy for it, as likely

there will be no manual or info sheet with the camera. It is an old

one.

[cooper8168]

Hi Mike!

 

Yes - 120 and 220 are the standards. What did you buy? Some models allow the

introduction of polaroid or 35mm, but as far as I know, all accept 120 and most

accept 220. I'm a bit of a MF newbie myself (bought a Mamiya 645 1000s early in the

summer). You'll never look back.

[mike walden]

<p>Well, as ashamed as I am to say this, I bought the Russian Lubitel 166 for $15.00 on eBay. I am not sure I want to go medium format, so I wanted to spend really the lowest amount possible on the MF camera so I could put more money into some lenses for my 35mm SLR. Ive heard good and bad about the Lubitel.

<p>I just love the look of a B/W medium format image, and wanted to see what its all about.

<p>Now, I got a lot of research to do just to learn how to use one. I have never even seen a MF camera up close, much less used one.

<p>If you have any good links or information you can offer me, please do!

[mike walden]

Oh, BTW, am I ever sorry I started that other thread! Jeez, gonna keep my trap shut from now on.

[douglas_green1]

Well, a Lubitel is a step up from a Holga, but it probably is too crummy to give you a real appreciation for the benefits of medium format vs. 35mm. I probably would have recommended spending $40-$80 on a much higher quality TLR like a Yashica Mat or Yashica D, or a Meoptaflex V or VI, or one of the various other TLRs from the likes of Ricoh, Ikontaflex and others. I picked up a Yashica Mat in excellent shape with a quite good Tessar-copy Yashinon lens as a gift for a young photo student for around $60 on ebay ($51 + 8 shipping). Previously, I had also gotten a Ricohflex IIIb for $40, which is a more primitive camera, but it has a very nice lens. But if your Lubitel's shutter works, and it doesn't have any light leaks, and the film wind mechanism is working, it is probably serviceable enough, and might end up being as useful as that Ricohflex, but the main difference is, most Ricohflexes actually work properly, even after these many years, while most Lubitels do not.

[mike walden]

I am looking for B/W film for this camera. What brands are available that can be processed by a lab?

[cooper8168]

I use Ilford HP5 in my 645 and have been extremely happy with it.

 

<p>Regarding websites - I did some exhaustive research recently, and I have to say

that the best MF info can be found right here in River City, IMO. I've made almost all

of my decisions, from lenses to winders to cases, based on info I've gleaned from

this forum. Ken Rockwell (kenrockwell.com) has some useful but limited MF info as

well.

[cooper8168]

Also, try <A HREF="http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/index.html">this.</A>

[johnmarkpainter]

Mike,

You can take great pics on the Lubitel.

 

Some advice:

B&W looks much better than color on the Lubitel.

 

Focusing is very difficult on the Lubitel compared to just about ANY other MF camera.

Don't let that influence your decision to get a "real" MF camera later.

 

The Focus on the Lubitel is done ONLY on the little dot of ground glass in the finder.

Use the magnifier!

 

Start off by using 400 Film as you will need the help of not having to open up the

aperture much (the focusing issues).

 

From your post I gather that you don't process your own B&W film?

You should probably start....Do you have a local lab that can process 120 Film?

Check around before you buy film.

 

jmp

[shutay]

Mike,<br>

 

<p>Regarding B&W medium format films that can be processed at a regular colour minilab - you can also get Kodak T400CN, and also Kodak Portra 400BW - these are both C-41 process black and white negative films. I've been using T400CN and I am quite happy with it.</p>

 

<p>Not so sure about the Lubitel and 3-element lensed Seagulls, but a Yashica-Mat wouldn't have been expensive either, but would be a much better camera. I have shot comparison shots with my Yashica-Mat LM and Nikon 35mm gear and the Yashica blows the Nikon away partly because of a decent lens, but mainly because of the much larger film area!</p>

 

<p>Other options that you have if you want to buy a medium format camera for USD100 or less is to try a medium format folder (even rock bottom prices if you look around). Have a look around camera exchange shops around your area. If you're in places like Malaysia or such you'd be out of luck, but most large cities in Europe and US will have such a shop. You may have to get to know the shop owner and tell him what you're looking for (e.g., Agfa Isolette or Record) and pick one up. These can be in quite grim condition (especially bellows with light leaks), so watch out. There is also a guy called Jurgen Kreckel who reconditions, CLA's and then resells folders on eBay (his eBay ID is certo6). I bought a Welta Weltur from him and it has been an excellent performer. Great thing about these folders is that they are smaller and lighter than a Lubitel. Smallest and lightest medium format anywhere (apart from a Holga, of course). Focusing is usually by guess/estimation, but works quite well with a bit of practice, especially if you shoot in bright conditions and use hyperfocal settings. These can produce very good results too (especially with landscapes, some street shots), but critical focus can be quite tricky to achieve. Still, with B&W film you can achieve a lot with these folders, and then decide if you want to go further. Have a look at this site for more information about medium format folders:</p>

 

<p><a href="http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/folder.html">http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/folder.html</a></p>

 

<p>Still, you <u>will</u> have fun with your Lubitel!</p>

 

<p>Regards, - Jason</p>

[mike walden]

I definitely have developed my own B/W film before, but that was when I had access to a lab. I dont have that at home, and only plan to do so if I indeed like MF well enough to warrant the expense and space. I will likely try the Kodak film or other that can be processed by any lab that does 120. I think Dale's Photo Lab does 120, and thats where I send my 35mm.

[dennis_oconnor2]

I will also vote for the 400 speed C41 films that the one hour minilab can develop and print for you... XP2, Portra, or tcn400... Show us a scan if you get one...

[doug_bennett]

Try XP-2. Unlike the Kodak C-41 B&W films, it can also be printed in a darkroom.

 

As to processing your own film at home: all you need is a small daylight developing tank, and a completely darkroom or (preferably) a changing bag to load the film. No real space required at all.

 

If the Lubitel doesn't give you good results, don't give up on medium format. As others have suggested, get a cheap Yashica, or my favorite, a Minolta Autocord.

[mike walden]

Doug: I do have a film processing tank and a changing bag. Actually, these are new and I have never used either one yet. I may try that. Although, I still hate the chemicals. And, I wont let the lubitel sour me on MF. If I like it, regardless of the performance of the Lubitel, I will purchase a better unit. Never having used a MF, I am not sure yet what all the hype is about. Is it because of the size of the negative and the size prints it will yield? Is it the quality of the actual image itself?

[robert_eastman]

Getting 120 prints and developing done at labs is expensive. Particularly compared to 35mm. Don't let this put you off. I really only shoot tranny and traditional B+W 120 film because of this. I don't know how accurate a lubitel shutter is (or much about them at all really) but if you can get it tested you should consider shooting some tranny with it. You WILL get hooked once you see a few 120 slides.

[pavelp]

Ljubitel is actually quite fun to use and nothing to be ashamed of. I have the version 2 and my wife just loves the pictures this camera takes. She thinks they look very romantic (I guess all the lens deffects are working at full rate to contribute to this look).

 

If you decide to stick with the MF, you might want to get lat least 4 element lens TLR to get better quality than from the Ljubitel. They are still quite affordable and the prices are just dropping because of the migration to digital. Good affordable step ups from the Ljubitel would be Minolta Autocord (with famous Rokkor glass), Ricoh Diacord (L or G), Flexaret (later models) or The Ultimate TLR: Mamiya C330 (this one has a lineup of seven lenses).

 

Standard medium format film is 120 or 220. Be aware that there are older cameras that take 620 film (very limited production and quite pricey). Also, most of the old TLR's and folders won't take 220 (they are 120 only). There is a difference in the film thickness and if you put 220 into 120 only camera, your focus may be off.

 

As for developing and printing, I have the lab to do my color negatives or slides and then scan them on Epson 3170 scanner. I was never happy with 5x5's from the lab, there are really not a way to judge the performance of the MF camera.

 

Once you get comfortable with your exposure and focusing on the MF camera, shoot a roll of slides. It's an experience.

[mike walden]

<p>Thanks for the good responses!

<p>Since this thread is already started, what can anyone tell me about this particular camera. Thinking about purchasing it since I paid next to nothing for the Lubitel. Are their differences in each brand of MF camera as there are with 35mm SLR's?

<p>I dont even know which model this one is. All I know is it is a <b>Rolleiflex Twin Lens Reflex camera with a Carl Zeiss Tessar 3,8 75mm lens</b>.

[mike walden]

<p>Here is a picture of the actual camera.

 

<br><br>

<img src="http://mywebpages.comcast.net/mwalden/rollei_flex.jpg" border="1"></img>

[mike walden]

Owner says it is Pre WWII, believe its vintage is 1930's. Shutter speeds from "B" to 1/300th, 120 film 6x6 negative, case is NOT original but in good user condition. All shutter speeds work and film counter works. lenses are clear but uncoated.Shot several rolls of film and was very happy with the great prints.

[douglas_green1]

What does he want for it? I was going to say that I'd be sure to carefully check out the lens and the shutter to see that they are in good working condition, and that the focus was reasonably well calibrated, but it sounds like you already did with your test shots. TLRs are simple cameras, and other than those things, and the ability to seal out light from the film chamber, there's not too much else that can go wrong with them.

[shutay]

Mike,

 

Just to clarify, between the two Kodak C-41 process Black and White films, the Kodak Portra 400BW is according to Kodak itself, "not suitable for printing on silver halide papers", so you would only really use this for printing only on colour paper. However, not having tried this myself, I can't tell you what actually does happen if you do! ;)

 

However, the Kodak T400CN film is intended for printing on traditional B&W paper, and in fact, with T400CN you can print on either colour or black and white paper, which was the original reason for my using this film. You can check up on the recommended printing guidelines on the Kodak website for this.

 

Jason

[steve_chan5]

If you have a changing bag and a tank that will take MF, diafine is not so hard to work with. I develop Tri-X 120 in my bathroom regularly with diafine.

Diafine and tri-x is the ideal combination for cheapskate slackers who want to shoot MF B&W. Pick up an Epson flatbed with MF film scanning capability and you'll be all set.

[mike walden]

<p>$80 gets it to my door. I have not used this camera Douglas. I just posted "borrowed" photos pasted all together in photoshop. I have them on my persoanl web space so I can delete them real quick.

<p>He says the camera works very well, although, me not knowing him personally, I cannot know how much he actually knows about the camera.

<p>I mostly would like to hear from any of you that can tell me what model this is, and any other information about it such as viewscreen upgrades, lenses, faults to look for etc. That is, if you can recognize the camera model from the pics and info I supplied.

[s._c.]

Looks like an Original Standard Rolleiflex model 620/621.

[mike walden]

You are exactly right S.C.! After a couple hours searching the web, I finally found a page that listed ALL Rollei models and there it was.