phil_royall1

<a>http://www.zonezero.com/calibration/english.html</a>

Did this with the first roll I put through my 1000s, also realised that I didn't really know how to focus using the split pea rangefinder spot. Never even developed the roll, though I'm sure you just missed your first few shots.

Just the one polariser will work just the same as a 2 stop ND. Well, mine does anyway when you minimise the polarisation.

As far as I know, they only make a polariser, which is designed to that Mamiya 7 owners can flip it up to see the effect via the Rangefinder. I'm not sure about the quality etc, though I doubt if Mamiya would put a badge to a shoddy peice of kit. I personally use a Heliopan polariser, and it's great.

The main advantage of MF for me was that I had to spend more time over each shot (no meter, so learning to use a handheld meter was great). With my fully automatic 35mm SLR I just used to rattle off stacks of shots with no thought, and I certainly didn't learn what had happened to make each shot look like it did!

 

I would think that digital is much the same, if not more so, you'd probably get better shots to start with, using a scatter gun approach, but you miss out on the thought. Medium format has made me learn hoe to take photos.

You need a REALLY good scanner to get enough detail to burn in digitally, and especially for medium format! Flatbed scanners don't really have the range required (unless you pay about £3000 for one of the UMAX beasts), so really you have to spring for a film scanner, and all of a sudden we're talking vast sums (about £3000!).

 

Also, do you really want to spend more time in front of a computer?

I second the 645 1000s suggestion, I got mine (with an 80mm macro lens) for about £400 from eBay, absolutely fantastic. By the way, the macro lens focuses right from infinity to 1/2 life size, and it's pretty damn sharp all the way! I've used mine for everything from macro, to weddings, to landscapes and only ever been overjoyed.

I read in another thread that some medium format cameras allow large

format style movements. I'm assuming that this would be the older

type folding/bellows camera but do they have to be special ones? I'd

love to try out perspective control etc on a roll film camera.

 

Any help would be great,

 

Phil

Having said that if you ever say the words "Hasselblads are pish", you risk a holy war ;)

Also Lindsay, you are right about the friendliness of MF users, I noticed a real step in attitudes between 35mm and MF. Perhaps it's because we all take more time over our photography that we're more relaxed!

Medium format is exactly the same as 35mm, you just take more time when you're doing it. You have less inclination to hold down the shutter and hope that you get one which works! The 645E will show you a step up in image quality, but they are plastic bodied and rather limited in the advanced functions; they DO have a meter, but they have no mirror lock-up - 645 mirrors cause a bit of a jolt at some shutter speeds and can blur your images. Also I believe they lack the DOF preview.

 

They are also made mainly of plastic, so are most 35mm cameras, no real problem, but if you're going MF you might as well get an older 645 (or whatever - mine's the Mamiya 645 1000s, 25 years old, built like a tank etc, paid about $600 including a mint 80mm macro lens.) these WILL NOT break and will work like a true pro for as long as anyone cares for them.

 

Reversed images in the viewfinder are only if you use the waist level finder BTW, get a prism finger if you want to shoot portrait mode!

I've heard of this before, usually it's a problem with the synch terminals, one is more reliable than the other, can't remember which mind.

Digital is dead.

 

How many of us here sit and look at a computer all day? Why would anyone who does this day in, day out want to do a hobby which was the same as their day job?

 

I took up photography as a means to not use a computer! A few years ago I started seeing adverts for great camera kit with the reason for sale stated as "going digital", now I see more and more whistful digital users pining for the analogue kit they practically gave away in pursuit of the digital dream.

 

Also if digital gives so many new creative opportunities, why is every digital shot I see either an eye with the iris replaced with something else or a shot which is black and white, but has object still colour!

 

/rant

Perhaps just get the powerwinder or a grip for your 1000s? They did make one, it isn't compatable with the new ones though. My 1000s is (at least) 25 years old and is still going strong and I love it. The lenses are the same as the Super so you're not loosing on quality. If you don't miss the removable backs of the super I can think of no reason to trade up.

These look like just a low contrast print due to under exposure. For Zoney people out there, your girlfriends face should be in zone 6 (i.e, it's about 1 stop lighter than a mid tone grey) if you meter off her face, you need to add 1 stop to the reading to get a proper exposure.

 

Not sure where the sun is on your shots, unless it's shining directly in your girlfriends face, it'll bee too bright to look dark on the film. If the sun's to your side, then a polariser will darken it. Otherwise you could try the zone system properly:

 

Meter from your girlfriends face, say you get 1/125 at f8, meter from the sky, and you'll get 1/250 at f8. Now a decent blue sky (northern light) is, to a light meter about 18% grey, which is zone 5, but you want your girlfriends face to be in zone 6 (one stop brighter than the sky) so you need to add fill in flash of 2 stops to bring her back to corrrect exposure.

 

Did that make any sense?

Most cheap plastic filters are awful, Cokin I'm afraid fall into this catagory. The Grey grad is so called because it isn't neutral and will add a colour cast to your shots. There are however decent plastic filters, Lee filters, Singh Ray (and for about half the price of either) so are Hitech, I use hitech, they are great.

A lot of people clim that going digital has improved their photography in that they can instantly check the results and retake if needs be. I can't help thinking that this disposable technology means that although you get more decent pictures when you start, you miss out the learning process of getting a roll of poor pictures back from the lab.

 

I went MF last year and my photography has improved ten fold, medium format is slower, so I take more time with each shot and I learn from each slide I get back. I suspect that long term I'm going to improve as a photographer more by taking time and learning than I ever would by just separating the wheat from the chaff at the taking stage.

Don't know if you're in the UK, but try this lot...

 

http://www.camerasunderwater.co.uk/web_site/ewa/framesets/slr_cape.html

I think you can get converters from the Russian Kiev lenses. These lenses are supposed to be very good (but the cameras are unreliable).

Eddie is bang on the money. The 645E is a cheap medium format camera, the old 1000s was the absolute top of the range 645 at the time. I have a 1000s and it still feels brand new, also has the MLU and DOF preview which I believe are missing from the 645E. I got mine for £160 ( $250? ) plus £200 ($380) for a mint 80mm macro lens off eBay.

Find yourself a battery powered ring-flash, they're designed for close-up work.

 

Phil

Seems there are a couple of new ones coming out, the Photo 2400 (which has 2400 dpi) is out soon, and is about £100 ($140) less than the old 2450, both support scanning of up to 5"x4" film. The 3200 dpi I haven't heard of, but it sounds nice ;)

 

Phil

Hi Nicholas,

 

Difference in the lightmeters are probably duee to age/batteries, run some shots with slide film and you'll get a better idea about which is accurate.

 

MF slide projectors are available, but quite rare and quite expensive. That said the odd one comes up on eBay for a couple of hundred dollars.

 

Excessive contrast is usually due to the grade of paper the lab prints on, that said some films are higher contrast than others, could just be a bad mix.

 

Phil

You don't mention where you are connecting the flash, is it onto the hotshoe of your prism finder or using one of the two cord connection points. I seem to remember that one of these ports is more reliable than the other, can't remember which though. Hotshoe is usually the best bet.