35mm vs Medium Fomat

[FrankS]

Yes. Print optically. As it should be done.

 

[hamradio]

I can't see myself purchasing any more 35mm gear. Every once in a while I'm tempted to build a kit around a Bessa, Nikon S, or Canon P, but then I remember what a pain it is to mess with 35mm film.

When I owned an older DSLR I shot a ton of 35mm film, but after buying a full-frame DSLR, I have a really difficult time putting any energy and money into 35mm stuff. Mainly, scanning negatives is such a hassle - for me, it's not quite worth it to spend a few hours developing and scanning a roll of film (then cloning out dust) when I can get higher resolution (than my flatbed scanner provides) digital images out of the DSLR without having to mess around. Perhaps if I had a dedicated 35mm scanner, I would shoot more 35mm.

Medium format, on the other hand, is one thing I keep coming back to. I find it amazing that one can buy wonderful cameras and lenses for peanuts, and have great huge negatives to work with that scan easily.

Additionally, I'll echo what another poster said: it can a while to get through a 36 exp roll. Especially annoying if that roll took six months to complete, only to discover the camera had some issue throughout the entire thing. I like having ten shots to a roll with 6x7.

That's my two cents.

 

[slidesandthecity]

If I wanted higher IQ than 135 can deliver, which is imo quite a lot if you like CMS 20 II, I'd go straight to LF. Operating incl. carrying these cameras annoys me as much as operating 120 cameras, but at least the results are worth it.

 

[Spanik]

Went 100% MF for my film use. Maybe it slows down but that isn't a bad thing. I'm not into sports. And on vacation you spend more time looking around and enjoying it than taking photo's. Like it that way.

An RF645 is very compact and very easy to use. Film changing is maybe a bit harder than on an M645ProTL. And not much larger if you leave of the motor. Only downside is weight, but even that is reasonable compared to one of the larger DSLRs. And I don't need a power plug in the evening, one set of batteries lasts a year. I guess a Mamiya 6 or 7 would be about the same.

 

[kingsley244]

I do mainly street so 35mm is my staple camera, usually the Nikon S or the iiif. But occasionally I lug my Rolleiflex 2.8f with me and get lots of pleasure with it.

 

[zsas]

Started with 35mm last year when I got back into the photo game then bought a Mamiya 645 and fell in love with medium format. Just thought I see what folks here at RFF thought themselves. I shoot strickly B&W film.

Haaaa - We must'a passed each other in the hall 🙂

So I started with a Mamiya 645 then bought a 35mm and fell in love with the medium.....

 

[squareshooter]

big negs

big negs

A big, fat negative is a great thing to have in the darkroom. I have shot half a roll on my Bilora Bella 66 non-SLR, non-rangefinder and we shall see soon how the negs look. I am trying to work up my nerve to toss some 127 film into my Bilora Bella 44. And, I have a "new" Yashicamat that I need to run a roll of 120 through. And my Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 110-size film camera needs a roll run through it, too. Busy, busy, busy.

 

[Calzone]

As the prices for a used "Swedish cube" aka Hassy are so ridiculously low, I was tempted to give it a try but since I got the MM last year, that MF GAS is gone 😉.

Klaus,

The Monochrom is somewhat a game changer, but I will continue to shoot 120. I'm a bit worried though that some MF cameras might not get used enough to justify keeping.

Cal

 

[Mcary]

As the prices for a used "Swedish cube" aka Hassy are so ridiculously low, I was tempted to give it a try but since I got the MM last year, that MF GAS is gone 😉.

Maybe time for some 4x5 GAS 🙂

 

[bwcolor]

I shoot color and low light using a digital camera. All b&w is film. Almost all of the images hung in my house are mf. All of my recent b&w has been 35mm. I enjoy shooting 35mm rangefinders more than mf rangefinders, but the digital and 35mm goes into photobooks and mf on the wall. This hasn't been by intent.

 

[Rogier]

There is no substitute for square inches of film....

 

[icebear]

Klaus,

The Monochrom is somewhat a game changer, but I will continue to shoot 120. I'm a bit worried though that some MF cameras might not get used enough to justify keeping.

Cal

Hi Cal,

the main reason I am so happy with the MM is the level of control I have in the process. I could never have achieved this in the darkroom what I can easily do in LR - and I am in no way an expert, I'm just pushing around some sliders🙄.

Unless you have the option to develop your own film and do wet printing yourself, you will never get a B&W result the way you feel it should be. Starting with a perfectly clean negative.

Maybe a pro lab can do that, where you have your "go-to buddy" every time you drop of a film or want a custom print.

So that issue, I see with film does apply *to me* regardless of the *film* format.

Having seen tack sharp and perfectly exposed negatives/slides out of Hassy and Linhoff on a light table with a 5x Rodenstock magnifier, I know that bigger film real estate can be gorgeous.

 

[Calzone]

Hi Cal,

Unless you have the option to develop your own film and do wet printing yourself, you will never get a B&W result the way you feel it should be. Starting with a perfectly clean negative.

Klaus,

My thoughts exactly. The Monochrom does make things easy with a big/huge step towards MF resolution in a smaller package.

I put off the wet printing, and now I have a wet printing backlog that will take my retirement to diminish. I'm 55 1/2 now and I figure in 4 years I'll quit my day job for good. No compromises here. I have a complete darkroom in storage, but I don't have the space to set it up currently.

Meanwhile I can learn how to extract great images with digital using the Monochrom. Again no compromises.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

There is no substitute for square inches of film....

Perhaps really great technique, perfect exposure, perfect development, and mucho slow speed film on a tripod...

Cal