stephen_kruft

Gosh, I don't know. But I agree older MF cameras do have quirks. Then again, so do old 35s. I had a short attention span when I was younger. The first time I tried to load a Leica M2 I got no pictures, and I got none when I loaded a Hasselblad for the first time and put the film upside down. Some cameras have odd ways to open the backs (try a Mamiya C330S - not F -without instructions). I think it is just that in earlier days people were expected to read the instructions and learn a series of steps and cautions that did not come naturally.

There are a thousand answers depending on what you want to do and spend. As others have advised, I suggest books that will give you detailed guidance.

 

(Personally - when traveling I have brought along everything from serious medium-format cameras to none at all, and when I go on a casual trip where I have no special plans, I bring an old Nikon point and shoot that is nothing great but uses AA batteries and takes adequate pictures. I originally bought it to go to Jamaica in fact. Its only bad point is, it has no zoom lens. When I am a little more serious I usually bring a 35mm SLR. If I were younger I would probably have and bring a digital camera on casual trips.)

This being an older, completely manual camera that cannot interface with a flash except to fire it(much like the Pentax Spotmatics I sometimes still use), there is no benefit to TTL (through the lens) capability. Since it is a film camera there is no danger of high voltage from a flash damaging it. So any ordinary flash will work and the advice above is fine. You probably want the automatic features that most flashes have. Beyond that, there are many articles about this topic, and many considerations - weight, power, battery type, etc. It all depends on what you do.

 

Brand-wise, I have personally used only Metz flashes for many years and have no complaints, but there are plenty of good makes. Probably the most common less-expensive flashes that pros use are the Vivitar 283 and 285, now discontinued but made for decades, then Sunpak.

If you mean the older Super-Takumar, many of these were 49mm rather than 52.

 

I agree with you though - don't buy a bunch of filters for no reason.

I recall:

 

My own first "real" camera in 1960-something was a Rollei 3.5F with a huge Graflex flash.

 

120 was always used much more than 220. It was widely available anywhere, 220 was not, and many cameras would not use 220. I think I never used 220 until later when I used Mamiya TLRs.

 

Those were the only rollfilms commonly used in high-quality cameras in the 60s anyway. There were box cameras and one Rollei in smaller roll formats, like 127 (4x4), and box cameras that used 620, which was the same size as 120 on different spools. MF was still the pro format, but many pros and soldiers had used 35mm in the wars, usually Leicas, and by the early to mid-60s when I started, already there were a lot of Nikon Fs with motor drives around. A huge "fad" of amateur photography, with Japanese 35s, was just starting up. Schools had classes in 35mm.

 

You are right that at the time TLRs were the common pro MF cameras, but there were some SLRs like Hasselblad and the early Bronicas. As I recall, the first Hasselblads with focal-plane shutters had been replaced not long before by the 500 series. It was funny that those old Bronicas, with Nikkor lenses, were in all the stores but I never saw one in use.

 

In the 40s and 50s there had been much more use of LF, as in the 4x5" press cameras. I remember seeing some as a child but they were mostly obsolete when I started to shoot. Rarely you would see someone taking school photos with them, and sheet film in all sizes was still available everywhere. I tried a press camera in high school.

 

If you had cameras without separate backs, like all or virtually all TLRs, and had to load often, 220 made sense. But you can load 120 in a TLR very quickly with practice, and pros have assistants.

 

Also there were developing tanks that would take several rolls of either 120 or 35 at once, while 220 needed specialized, fairly expensive tanks, and 220 was much harder for the amateur to learn to load onto the stainless steel developing reels because they were so wide. I remember ruining some shots the first time I tried.

Suggestion: search eBay for past auctions to see what they have sold for.

When this happened to me I bought one of the aftermarket modern rechargeable batteries that are found on eBay and other sources, and that worked fine. There are other methods also, such as adapters for nine volt batteries, but I did not try them. There are many discussions of these alternatives on the Web.

I agree except that I think you can do what you want with the more powerful Brownline equipment if you wish.

 

Get more than 400ws unless you are for some reason not diffusing the light. Don't expect too much of the MW3U because it is really a hair or background light, or for easy carrying in portable outfits. The only Brownline head that is very versatile and mounts to softboxes easily is the more expensive M11, which is the same as the Blackline 102. The others will work with umbrellas, however.

 

(That being said, the first studio flash I ever had was two MW3 and 400ws, but I had practically zero budget then.)

 

You can download the manuals and see what choices the various packs have for reduced power or multiple lights.

I have used almost all the Takumar lenses under 400mm (Super and not) and have had success with all, except that the older zooms, like all old zooms, are not as close to prime lens quality as the newer ones are. I have used the 1.4 normal, 105 and all the macros more than any others and can recommend those from a lot of experience. I have not used the Takumar fisheye because I got another brand long ago, but I have one to try out one day soon.

 

Bodies: all Pentax bodies are fine and great to hold, but the batteries are hard to find or must be replaced with other types. The bodies can be repaired, when they eventually fail by having the mirror stick in the up position. The one "modern" (70s, automatic anyway) body I know that will work with the screwmount lenses is the Chinon CE3, and there is an amazingly fancy autowinder for it. It does not feel as "natural" as the Pentax bodies.

Right - as the other answers say, the 500CM uses standard cable releases. The only exception I know is that not all cable releases will fit into the Hasselblad accessory grip if you break or lose the one that came with it.

The lightest aren't the most sturdy! It's a compromise between the two, and with the weight and balance of the camera and lens to consider.

You should get concrete answers here. I don't have any but would suggest testing it against another spotmeter using a gray card before working on it.

I don't know if I would change systems for that reason, especially if you have a lot of equipment. But the 500 series are the only MF SLRs I have ever used (I started with TLRs) and I have been happy. While they have their odd features, as you know, they are good cameras and not that expensive now. As always, the expense is in the Zeiss lenses.

 

So rent one and see if you still like it.

I agree completely with Nadine and Graham, who know an amazing amount of information. Seek their guidance!

 

I used C330 for many years for general (amateur) work and still have them. I would much prefer them over a C220 for anything requiring quick winding. Also - while a TLR is not ideal for action, of course it can be used that way. Besides weddings, if you look at old photos of press photographers, you'll see they went from Speed Graphics to Rollei TLRs in the 50s and used them for years, often shooting through the plain "sports finder" on top in low light.

It depends on what you want to do and how much to spend, and whether you care if the readout is digital. Because I use a spotmeter quite a bit, I have always had a separate one of those (rather than an attachment) and use a Luna Pro F for normal metering. There is a great range of meters available for all prices, though. I see Sekonic and Gossen used a lot, and though Minolta seems to make good meters, less of those.

 

If you look at used meters, beware of ones that need odd batteries that are hard to find. Meter batteries have gone bad at inconvenient times, for me anyway.

I have Speedotron, and found some of this used. No problems with the used stuff except (1) you get heads with burned out bulbs and (2) People are rough on the cables so wires may be bad. You may want to be sure you get enough power for more than two heads, though, and consider Brownline.

It depends on what you want and how cheap, but if you want flash, many people use two or three old flashes, with a slave trigger, or buy used equipment. I think I found my first little studio strobes used for well under $100, though you have to look around a lot.

To keep your budget low you could get a Pentax screw-mount such as Spotmatic, for which lenses, etc. are very reasonable (and which is not a clunky camera).

The chrome lenses (probably others too but I don't know) use a metal shade that says on it "38" and screws into the threads in place of the Series VIII filter ring. They are expensive but aftermarket models are available. I think it would be hard to make the proshade wide enough - I have not seen one used on the SWC.

With the manual Spotmatics, only the F will do wide open metering and only when you use a SMC (or Super-Multi-Coated) Takumar.

Hard to say. If taken with film it could be a filter (or non-daylight film or a colored light) with a small amount of light on the people and the branch, or a little filtration used when printing. Also perhaps a wide-angle lens.

I agree with the other commenter about zeroing. My first spotmeter was a Spot Sensor ($99 I think) and it was very accurate as long as I had it, so test it against another meter.

 

A "trick" I was shown when I got this meter is that it will accept 43mm filters, so if you are using a filter on your lens and are worried about forgetting to adjust for filter factor, you can just put a filter on the meter. I didn't do this but you can.

It all depends on what you will do with what speed film (if you do film) and want to spend. There are many books, sites and threads about this.

 

The more power you have, the more versatility. Most or all lights can be turned down.

 

The reason so much power is used today and models not permanently blinded is that the modern way is to shoot through softboxes or umbrellas or other devices that absorb the light. In the "old days" when people would use more direct light or silver umbrellas and often get more harsh effects, it was common to see small outfits, especially for portable use.

Don't get a fisheye unless you want a fisheye. I have always enjoyed using mine but they are very different from rectilinear superwides.

A flash attachment made by the same company that makes Leica cameras. Ask on the Leica forum.