marck mcgill

And in fact I agree.

Chan, that's a 6x7... Though I'm a total 6x7 fanatic, I'd go on the 6x6 for didactical usage. It seems that the pupils have no idea of what "medium format is", and the RB is very complicated, with a ton of safeties, security locks and other things...

 

I vote for the Rolleiflex TLR: it's easy, known for its robustness and a true classic in photography. It'll give the chance to teach something about the history of photography as well!

 

I'm wondering if a choice MIGHT be one of those Hasselblad-style Kievs (was it the "Kiev 88"?) - in case you wanted to teach how to handle a typical SLR camera. I don't know if it's damage-proof, though, I've never owned one. I'm suggesting it only because it's very similar to a true Hasselblad, so if you know how to operate it, you almost know how to operate a Hasselblad as well...

Dearest William,

 

I agree with most of the above: you definitely DON'T need "10K$" to switch to medium format. And yes, using manual mid-F cameras can be SO fun, that even just clicking the shutter or focusing something can give you true pleasure and amusement.

 

The article suggested in the previous message could be quite misleading, as it is totally towards the 6x6 format, and every alternative is treated in very few lines. This is a matter of personal taste of course, thus I respect the writer's opinion. Anyway, I must say that almost every "strong point" of the square format vs. the other ones as pointed out in the text, is a weak spot to me. This is very subjective, so maybe you should read further until you have an opinion by yourself.

 

A good Occam Razor would be to see which maximum format your enlarger can handle (supposed that you already have one, of course!). If it goes up to 6x6 only, then you've almost already made your choice... But if it goes up to 6x7 or 6x9, well, why not taking the larger formats in account?

 

6x6 would be almost a mandatory choice just in case you wanted to purchase a very cheap camera - to give mid-F a try. In this case, there are many russian cameras that has an astonishing price for value ratio. And you won't cry for your money if you'll find out that the medium format sucks (hard to think that this is gonna happen, though!)

 

If I was you, I wouldn't sell the 35mm gear immediately, anyway. Small and medium format have different purposes. Sometimes it happens to be asked to a party with your camera to take some pictures, or you know, your dad wants a memory of that and the other's marriage with 100000 folks behind and so on - I wouldn't burn a good 120 roll for that. You may find 35mm easier to carry with you in a backpack, too. For now, keep both of them, if you can.

I know that this discussion pops up now and then on these pages. Is

there anything new?

 

I know that there is a good .pdf about the FM and few HTML pages

about the FE on that cool famous malaysian website, but I can't

believe that nobody ever put a complete .pdf about the newer FM2 and

FE2 on the internet.

 

Someone did find anything in the meanwhile?

Did you checked the mirror braking foam close to the viewfinder glass? Sometimes - when it's aged - it gets so sticky and glueish that the mirror will get stuck into it for some seconds, until the return spring / gravity pulls it back down from that sort of "adhesive tape"...

You mean: if it's 6x8 or 6x7.9 or whatever ???

Yes, I couldn't figure the point about Pentax 35mm and Pentax 6x7 too. They have no accessory in common, AFAIK.

 

I'll just add few considerations more. The P67 and RB67 weight is quite the same (and it's HUGE if you backpack), so you can keep your current gear from this point of view: no reason to go Pentax.

 

Actually, I don't see any advantage in the Pentax system at all. The only cool thing I can think about is the coupled TTL metering (if you're lucky enough to find that pentaprism). Though, even in this case I must say that a hand-held meter would be WAY much lighter...

 

On the other hand, consider that if you buy a second back you could use both B&W and color films with a SINGLE RB67 CAMERA with a very small addition of weight to your system. This is damn cool, and you can't have it with the Pentax.

The C330 (which I own) had some film-type and sensibility reminder which were coaxial to the parallax correction knob and disappeared in the C330F, which has a simplified layout. The multi/single exposure was on a separated little knob in front of the winding crank, which was very safe and handy.

 

In the C330F, a focus-lock lever and a film-type holder on the back were introduced. The parallax correction knob design was simplified, as said above.

 

While the C330 and the C330F are both great and very similar to each other, the C330S is a mess, IMHO. The multi/single knob became concentric with the winding crank, which sucks. The focusing knobs had a different radius, thus the old accessories won't fit anymore and that's nonsense. The same could be said for the screens, which are no longer compatible with the previous ones. The strap has a new special plug, so you can't use anymore a normal plain 2$ strap but only the dedicated one (sort as with the RB67...). Finally, the masterpiece: the "removable back", no longer compatible with previous backs and sheet holders, and thus now totally unuseful because no alternative to the standard back has ever been produced. Or at least, AFAIK...

 

You can relax: you bought a GREAT camera...

Actually, I currently use a 220 RB back on the RB67 with 120 roll films. Don't know if this apply with the RZ as well, but anyway I expected some problems at the beginning - like to miss 1 frame because of the different radius of the takeup spool (the paper back is thick, hence the radius grows up faster and the film SHOULD be pulled more than it had to). Nothing. Ten frames, perfect pictures. The only thing is that you have to remember to wind up at the 10th frame, as the back doesn't warn you that the roll is over.

Erin, the cool thing in a FM2 is that its mechanics will still work even if everything electronic would be burned. Anyway, for a broken unit with a not-well-known problem, I personally repute 150$ an upper limit. I would buy it only if it was in PERFECT shape, which seems to happen rarely when the meter is already gone... If you ask me, I'd say "buy it" but be very self-conscious...

What about a fully working CHROME fm2, instead? ;-)

Effectively, mine is broken the same way. That must be a real weak spot!