I have shot with every format up to 4x5, and the 645 format remains my favorite because it is much larger than 35mm, but still allows for a compact camera (RF645), and fits 32 pics on a 220 roll. I don't like 6x7 because there are no compact 6x7 cameras . . .the Mamiya is relatively compact, but the sheer size of hte negative makes it hard to compare with the nearly 35mm sized body of the Bronica.
I like 645 because it is not so big that I can't reasonably scan the frames myself. I tried scanning a 6x9 at full resolution on my multi pro, and forget it. The scanner/software combination has a hard time handling the data load . . . like 600MB.
I like 645 because I can shoot slides and negs and eyeball them without using a loupe.
I like 645 because it is a very efficient solution to the 6x6 cropping thing - and the vertical format in SOME cameras makes it possible to squeeze a big negative into a small body.
I would own a 35mm, but why do that when I can have a camera nearly as small, but that shoots negatives 2.7 times larger and uses a leaf shutter and has amazing metering?
6x9 is just crazy big, and the cameras are so big as to be illogical in the field.
4x5 is too much a pain . . . I can't get the negs printed without sending them off to Ivey, and I never print at large enough sizes to warrant the extra difficulties such as loading film, loupe focusing, heavy tripods, etc. 645 is more than enough. 4x5 was just insane.
Digital darkroom is the best for my needs and tastes. I find that with a top end scanner, I can get the work into the most useable form (digital) and have better images than with any digital camera under $20,000. I like being able to fine tune the heck out of my work using CS2 instead of struggling with chemicals and wasting paper in a bathroom without a decent fan. I find that I can soup my own negatives when I feel like it to save money, and print on my Canon IP5000 when I want a print and quality is 90% important. I like a hybrid workflow because 100% traditional is too much trouble and too expensive for me, and 100% digital just looks cruddy.
I make money - but not even enough to call it "making money". I might make a couple hundred bucks on a shoot - and paying work only comes around twice maybe every year. But I don't mind. . . paying gigs make me nervous. I am almost always sick after a day-long shoot. Just the stress.
If I could have only one camera - the Bronica RF645. I spent a long time coming to that conclusion, and eventually sold all of my other gear to pay for it. I think about buying an M7, but I have a hard time talking myself into paying for something that won't make better negatives and is so expensive that I'd be afraid to use it. I think about buying into a larger format, but I never print large enough to make sense of that - and I'd not be able to scan the negs efficiently myself.
I think about the new Nikon F6 . . I know it, blasphemy. I think about it because that and the new ZF 85mm f1.4 and a 28mm f2.8 would make a marvelous journalism setup. Though I don't know about hte focusing mechanism, and maybe the super fast silent wave motors in the Nikon lenses would be even better. But then, how often do I get journalism assignments? Never. I don't even shoot journalism. And any paper would give me their house D2h to use anyway - they don't want to pay for developing and scanning negs when they can get everything instant.
