robert_king13

<p>Yes, I'll be sure to post some photographs when I have them. It might be a good long while before that happens though, as it normally takes me a good while to get film developed and then a good while before I can objectively assess what I have.... but eventually I will pop some up in the thread.</p> <p>Thanks once again to everyone.</p> <p>Oh, and I will be sure to have a tipple of the whisky!</p>

<p>Well everybody has given me a lot more to think about, and I have finally (I think) come to a decision about what to buy:</p> <p>For a few reasons I think that the <strong>Bronica SQ-a</strong> is the right option.</p> <p>i. why not the SQ-ai? – because the SQ-ai is too expensive for me (it seems that it's at least £100 more), and besides I don't use a flash and so the SQ-a should be fine for my needs.</p> <p>ii. frame size – shoots both 6x6 and 6x4.5 dependent upon which back you have attached.<br> The advantage of these over 6x7 for my purposes is threefold: a. the slightly smaller negative means that the camera is smaller; b. each can get printed to a pretty big size (ample for my needs); c. there is the extra negatives per roll – which when you're on a budget like mine is a bonus</p> <p>iii. pretty much all of the complete set-ups I have seen come with a WLF – which is one of the things that most draws me to MF.</p> <p>iv. and finally, there is plenty of reasonably priced kit out there for the Bronica SQ-a</p> <p>My thinking at the moment is to get both a 6x6 and a 6x4.5 back, stick some velvia 50 in the latter, and some ilford hp5 in the former. The thinking behind this is that I am used to shooting 35mm colour film, and so the change to 6x4.5 shouldn't be too difficult. And I think that shooting B&W in the square format for a bit should help me to focus on the composition of the images that I make and help me get used to the square frame. I've also bought a little square sketch pad an some payne's grey watercolour to help me think about the format even more.<br> Also, I will be metering using my Minolta x-700. Not the most convenient set-up, I know – But I can't afford a light meter as well as the camera at the moment, so it will have to do. I won't be rushing to take any action shots, so it shouldn't be too much of a bother.</p> <p>Thanks very much for the advice that everyone has contributed, and I would love to hear what people think of my decision.... And if anybody in the UK has an SQ-a that they're looking to sell for a good price, then let me know! I'm hoping to get one by the end of the month, in order that I have a chance to make sure that everything's working (i.e. enough time to shoot a roll and get it developed).</p> <p>I hope that all made sense... I'm suffering from a horrid cold at the moment.</p> <p>Rob.</p>

<p>Thanks very much for the responses everybody, and please keep them coming. Perhaps I would just say to those who have been suggesting RF cameras that, although I recognise the benefits of these cameras, I have explicitly ruled out getting one – it is, as I said, the WLF that I find attractive, as it seems to me that it is a style of composition far removed form that of the 35mm SLR.<br> All in all you've given me a lot to think about – and I think, probably, have helped me decide not to get the RB67. thinking forward to where I go from here, I have a few questions to pose directly in response to what four of you have said (and of course anybody else can please respond!). Here goes:</p> <p><strong>Bernard Miller</strong> suggested getting a 6x6 and composing as though 6x4.5 if desired. This does sound like quite an attractive prospect, which I had perhaps too readily written off before (the idea of cropping an image I find a little uncomfortable – One thing that I like a bout film is how simple/non-existent the/my workflow is... I just make a picture, I don't scan, I don't tweak, I just send off the film for processing and enjoy the results when they come back). Of course the added benefit of using a 6x6 is that I can have a go with the square frame (which <strong>Jose Angel </strong>has used pretty effectively – especially in the picture of the caribena laden bottom). One thing that I would ask is: <em>is it possible to mark the ground glass such that it is possible to view the constraints of the 6x4.5 frame on a 6x6 camera?</em><br> <em> </em>If I were to go for a 6x6 it would probably be a Bronica, as unfortunately I can't afford a Hassleblad or a Rolliflex. I'm a poor research student!</p> <p><strong>Ward</strong> (sorry I forgot to note down your first name, and it's all the way back on the first page now!) made the very good point that the camera is just weight, and that I could cut down the rest of my kit. I already have pretty lightweight kit – a 1.3kg one-man tent, down sleeping-bag, thermorest, light-weight stove, etc... I pack everything (including food) for whatever length of time into (or hanging from) a 38 litre bag. I like travelling light, so perhaps this is another reason that the RB67 is not for me!<br> And because I know that the more info the better when responding to people's quandaries on here, I'll mention a little more about the trip which I have planned this summer, and for which I am aiming to buy the camera. The plan is to hitch-hike up to the north of Scotland, do a few Monroes, try and make my way out to the outer Hebrides, maybe up to the shetland isle and photograph some sea-scapes. I will also be carrying a few books worth of summer reading as well (which normally take up a fair amount of room in my bag when I head out... maybe a thought is a kindle. But they're not very good to annotate! And obviously I am a little retrograde... isn't that why I shoot film?).</p> <p><strong>Joseph Dickerson</strong> mentioned the idea of a 6x9 view camera. This sounds like a wonderful Idea. In fact the though of a doubly flipped image (upside-down, and back-to-front) sounds like a great compositional opportunity! I must say that I didn't really know that such things existed before you mentioned them, so thanks for doing so.<br> I have had a quick look on ebay and keh this morning and a readily available and cheap version seems to be the Garflex Speed Graphic. What do people think about this camera (and the standard lenses that come with)? And any other information about a folding(/field) 6x9(/2x3 is the same thing, no?) would be very much appreciated! Is it possible to pick up something good for around the same price as an RB67 or GS-1?<br> And if anybody else has anything to say about 6x9 view camera that might not be obvious to me as a 35mm SLR user, and a recent learner about MF, then please do share this with me!</p> <p>And finally thanks very much <strong>Jose Angel</strong> for sharing a few compositions with us. I understand the point you are making about the minimal vertical or horizontal extension, but of course the images which you have taken don't need any extra extension because you composed them in a 6x6 frame (hence your decision to place the subjects in the centre, and the employment of the movement of the land in the second example to draw they eye to the central intrigue). Having said that, try and cut a picture which was composed for a 6x7 frame down to 6x6. I would be surprised to find that a well composed image did not loose something in being cut down! The frame determines the photograph which you take and, at the moment, the images which I imagine making fit a slightly elongated, rectangular, frame.</p>

<p>Hi everyone,</p> <p>I was hoping that you might be able to help me with a bit of a puzzle I am currently working through in order to decide which MF camera to buy. I've done a fair bit of reading, looked at a bunch of forums etc... but can't quite find the information that I need. What I really need is some first-hand accounts.<br> <em>Has anybody been hiking, hitch-hiking, or cycle touring with a Mamiya RB67??</em><br> I'm looking for a medium format camera for two reasons: i. that it permits large prints to be made, and ii. I really want to compose using a waist-level finder – I actively want an experience which is removed from that of using an SLR (I currently use a Minolta x700, which I will continue to use alongside whatever MF camera I pick up), so no speed-grips and no AE prisms. I want to use equipment that will facilitate a more reflective style of photography – hence why I'm not looking to buy a DSLR or an MF rangefinder (and I know that the Mamiya 7 and Pentax 67 are supposed to be good for the 'adventure' photographer).<br> On top of this I would also like to have a go at composing photographs in a 6x7 frame because it seems to me to be a slightly nicer ratio than the 35mm or 6x4.5 ratio – just a little squarer (whilst not the proper square of the 6x6 frame). But the problem is that I mainly want the camera to take hitch-hiking, walking, and cycle touring, and 6x7 cameras are a bit on the big and heavy side... I know that there is the Bronica GS-1, but there aren't a lot of parts and lenses going around for them, and so things tend to be a little more expensive, which is putting me off (they're also not that easy to get ahold of... I can only find a complete set up on ebay from Japan).<br> All of these considerations are leading me to the Mamiya RB67 (money constraints mean that I can't afford an RZ67, and I also like the look of how convoluted the process of using the RB67 is – two levers, bellows focus, floating optics, etc...)... but everywhere I read about it I keep hearing people talking about what a lump it is. Hence my question... has anybody taken one walking (and I really mean one week to one month+ wild-camping trips), or has anyone taken one on a cycle tour for a few weeks? And was that experience good or bad.<br> And if everyone thinks that it's a bad idea... then what about the Bronica ETRsi (which seems like the obvious choice from the 6x4.5 options)? Have people enjoyed using one for landscape photography? (By the way the kind of landscape photography I am inclined towards is more Thomas Joshua Cooper, or Thomas Struth – who I would argue is a landscape photographer – than Ansel Adams... though I'm not sure that has much bearing on what equipment – bar lenses – is best).<br> I should probably also add that I'm a healthy 24 year old man, if that alters the advice which might be given about carrying medium format cameras for extended periods.<br> And perhaps somebody has both an RB67 and an ETRsi, and could post a photo of them holding both side-by-side? That would be very welcome, to see both in comparison to a human body.</p> <p>Hopefully this is a new question, and people will have fun thinking about it for a bit – and some people better informed than myself will be able to help me make a decision.</p> <p>Thanks in advance,<br> Robert.</p>