120: love the photos but the cameras, eh.

[Nokton48]

For a bit more than an Arax 88, you can find a good Hasselblad 500C/M and 80mm T* and A12 filmback. I now have the 30mm Hasselblad Fisheye, but I bought into Kiev, due to the 30mm Zodiak fisheye lens. That seems to be a typical experience. And the 180mm F2.8 Sonnar.

 

[BW400CN]

A Voigtländer Avus 6x9 with a rollfilm back and a Rollfilm 6x9 are my MF gear a the moment.
Chep to find and fun to use!



Avus+Rollfilm 4 von BW400CN auf Flickr

 

[Letien]

If you don't enjoy it, don't do it. I love my rolleiflex but used it rarely because color processing is expensive. Now I enjoy it more when I go strictly B&W.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Letien
Why not process colour? It works out at £1 per roll and is as easy as mono. If you scan then good results can be had very cheaply.
Your Rollei and cheap colour kit can really sing:

 

[Spanik]

Yes, the Arsat 30mm. But it is a rather heavy piece of glass at 1 kg. Putting that as your standard lens in medium format and then complaining isn't really logical. You only need to add a Sonnar 180/2.8 to your bag and you have a perfect boat anchor. (I know, I do run with such a setup from time to time)

As for TLR's if your problem is going wider or longer then the Cxxx series is about your only option. Those are flexible camera's but the weight of the body isn't less than a Kiev 60. The lenses are less but they don't go to 30mm on the wide side nor 2.8 on the long end of the range. But you get macro trown in (with paralax...). Viewfinder of the Kiev is nicer for me. But they are quieter, my C330 is only bested by the Fuji G690BL. But then compared to a Kiev anything else is quieter...

Regarding a system or single camera, I would opt for a system. Even if it means starting out with a camera and single lens. It leaves you the option to expand if it fits. Of course that may mean putting up now with bulk and weight. If you say that you wanted wider often (compared to an 80mm probably) then you won't have much choice but to go for a system. Non system camera's are often limited to the standard focal. Unless you would go for the Fuji 690 series where a wide version is available. But that would mean a second camera if you want to go longer and then the weight jumps up more than with an extra lens.

 

[Austerby]

Definitely agree home-processed c-41 is straightforward and cheap with easy to achieve good results.

As for cameras then a Bronica ETRS or Mamiya 645 would be within budget and with superb image quality capabilties. Ffordes have quite a few ETRS for about £250 complete. Also suggest Fuji GS645 range - brilliant cameras.

 

[Bill Clark]

I have one of these:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/mamiya/645e.htm

It's a baby step in size (larger) of camera body from 35mm.

I've had mine since 2003

Still works just fine.

Here's the destruction book! (Ha):

http://www.butkus.org/chinon/mamiya/mamiya_645e/mamiya_645e.htm

 

[shadowfox]

Any of the Fuji GA645 is lightweight and very easy to use.
Very affordable in today's market with a little waiting and searching.

The result is undeniable, perfect for 11x14 inches prints using an enlarger:

 

[Ronald M]

Hasselblad is the best route. Rollie electronic SLR in 2 1/4 also.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hasselblad is the best route. Rollie electronic SLR in 2 1/4 also.

If you like square formats...

Cheers,

R.

 

[Letien]

Letien
Why not process colour? It works out at £1 per roll and is as easy as mono. If you scan then good results can be had very cheaply.
Your Rollei and cheap colour kit can really sing:

I wish I have that talent but no, I have to back to learn the basic B&W first. I already failed the last 3 rolls of Ilford Delta 100 in HC-110. Did you try this combination? Can you give some tips?

 

[rbiemer]

Yes, the Arsat 30mm. But it is a rather heavy piece of glass at 1 kg. Putting that as your standard lens in medium format and then complaining isn't really logical. You only need to add a Sonnar 180/2.8 to your bag and you have a perfect boat anchor. (I know, I do run with such a setup from time to time)


Regarding a system or single camera, I would opt for a system. Even if it means starting out with a camera and single lens. It leaves you the option to expand if it fits. Of course that may mean putting up now with bulk and weight. If you say that you wanted wider often (compared to an 80mm probably) then you won't have much choice but to go for a system. Non system camera's are often limited to the standard focal. Unless you would go for the Fuji 690 series where a wide version is available. But that would mean a second camera if you want to go longer and then the weight jumps up more than with an extra lens.

Not sure I'm obligated to be logical...😀 But you are right. I think my tolerance for lugging "stuff" around on the chance that I may use it has gone down. When I leave the house intending to shoot, The actual weight of my kit isn't really an issue. And the way I've been shooting 120 is not like I use my 35mm gear.

At this point, I agree that a system is a better choice for me than not and I can deal with a body and one lens for a while--maybe a long while.

Folks,
this discussion has helped me sort out my thinking about this, thanks!
Rob

 

[ninjaslim]

I'd say try the 5x4 with a roll back as per the first reply. view cameras are really involving but not exactly light weight.

At the other end of the spectrum, I'm dying to give a Natasha 6x6 pinhole camera a try

 

[raid]

Save up more, and get a SWC.
The Biogon 38mm lens is awesome, and handling is a joy.

 

[FrankHarries]

I've got different Hasselblads, Yashica Mat 124G and Rolleiflex, some folders - but the one and only for me is the Mamiya 6 for square - it's lightweight, easy to use and pictures are just great. I would save up for this cam...

 

[bgb]

If you want to go wide there is always panoramic

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/noblex_150ux.shtml

 

[Frontman]

It's all a matter of taste. I started out with the Pentax 67 and Mamiya RB, both of which are relatively inexpensive, and which also have a large variety of lenses. Along the way I also tried the Fuji GW/GSW cameras, the Mamiya Press, and others.

After much trial and error, I have found a couple cameras which agree with me the most. The first is the Rolleiflex. I love how it handles and operates, and I especially love the images it produces. Next is a very ancient Plaubel Makina with it's 100mm Anti-comar lens. This camera is quite small, and is pocketable when folded. It is not fast handling, and it's primitive film back will cause blisters when winding more than a couple rolls of film, but it does make great photos.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Also, why so much focus on the camera? IMHO, it's about the artwork, not the machinery that got you there.

Sometimes the camera is important. You wouldn't use a Hasselblad to shoot a football game, right? So, yeah there is a consideration to be had for the right tool for the job.

As for choice of medium format, I just switched from Hasselblad to Mamiya 6 because, among other reasons, I am in poor health and cannot carry heavy gear anymore.

 

[BW400CN]

Found my way into 120 with this little beauty:


Avus von BW400CN auf Flickr

From the first film:


Voigtländer Avus 6x9 Ilford XP2 von BW400CN auf Flickr

Love this very slow way to take a picture 😉
Focus on screen - set the time and apperature - change the screen for the 120 back - take the slider out - KLACK - get the slider in - take the 120 back out - put the screen back in - ready!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Save up more, and get a SWC.
The Biogon 38mm lens is awesome, and handling is a joy.

Uh... No. More a nightmare, as far as I am concerned. The lens is gorgeous -- mine is my standard lens on my Alpa -- but not the camera.

This is not to say that either of us is right and the other wrong, but it is to say that one man's joy is another man's nightmare.

Cheers,

R.