Does it make sense to go MF or M9?

[flip]

I recognize that I am potentially biasing my answers by the forum choice, but you folks use MF. I don't, yet. Periodically, I see a Makina (somewhat cheaper where I live) or some such MF and think about all the detail it could capture. Then I think of the hassle and cost of scanning to get that detail. And the trends in film production. I wonder if I wouldn't be better served by saving towards an eventual M9 for my already-purchased M glass. I'm hoping for some advice.

 

[Godfrey]

I now work with both M9 and 6x6 film. They're both wonderful.. They are quite different in how they 'see.'

If I could only have one, I'd probably keep the M9, as it is more versatile. But I'd really miss the 6x6 film.

I'm sure that doesn't help.

 

[StoneNYC]

I recognize that I am potentially biasing my answers by the forum choice, but you folks use MF. I don't, yet. Periodically, I see a Makina (somewhat cheaper where I live) or some such MF and think about all the detail it could capture. Then I think of the hassle and cost of scanning to get that detail. And the trends in film production. I wonder if I wouldn't be better served by saving towards an eventual M9 for my already-purchased M glass. I'm hoping for some advice.

Well your ultimate image will certainly be higher quality with an MF but ultimate convenience would be the M9...

And would be close enough for most larger prints up to like 2 foot x 3 foot then the MF would be much better.

This is all opinion...

 

[jamais]

I recommend not to take the mere theoretical approach when it comes to film and especially when it comes to film medium format. Take any decent MF camera and try if it works for you. A $150 TLR will do. Meanwhile you can save money for an M9 or Makina or whatever. This way you can decide later if you really want to spend that much money for an M9 or Makina while enjoying MF right now.

 

[thegman]

I'm biased, I like film. However if you like to take a lot of shots, it's always worth thinking about digital.

 

[Ronald M]

Film will only get to be more and more of a problem, specially 120. B&W you can do yourself. Color too, but is a pain.

I think a lot comes down to print size. I have had several 11x14 prints made from my new M9 and they are so crisp it makes you cry. They are better than I could do with 4x5 optical prints with good current lenses. The M9 prints were made on Kodak paper and a laser printer. I order the economy prints and do all color correction and sharpening myself, also soft proofing. AiProLab.com. This man runs the very best lab I have ever used. Larger prints will start to show more of a difference between MF film and digital. I don`t know where that point is.

Oh yes, the sharpening is photoshop default, amount 25, radius .7. No further sharpening required and there are no halos or other sharpening artifacts.

With film you have total control yourself over the whole process which has advantages.
When you farm it out, there is frequently trouble.

I have had a darkroom with the best equipment money can buy and used 35mm, 120 formats, and 4x5. The M9 is easily my favorite tool. I am sure the new Nikons will do as well. I have a D3 and all the 1.4 G lenses and it makes outstanding images also. Same for the cheaper ones, but you find quality issues in those bodies, but if you get a good one, a D600, D800, D3200, D7000 will make very nice prints. I will only buy the pro bodies because I have learned how to set up the focus so they work to perfection.
Consumer bodies are harder to work with and can not be set to my standards always.

 

[gilpen123]

Processing and size are issues if you do wlak arounds or traveling. Nothing beats MF on a tripod though.

 

[Eric T]

Save some money and put your M glass on a Fuji X-Pro1 or X-E1. Manual focusing is easy once you get the hang of it and AF is fast on Fuji lenses.
With the money you save from not buying an M9, get a Mamiya 7ii. The lenses for that camera are amazing.
Then you will have the best of both worlds. Modern digital and MF RF.
And developing color film isn't so bad. I just bought a water bath on eBay for $50.

 

[StoneNYC]

Save some money and put your M glass on a Fuji X-Pro1 or X-E1. Manual focusing is easy once you get the hang of it and AF is fast on Fuji lenses.
With the money you save from not buying an M9, get a Mamiya 7ii. The lenses for that camera are amazing.
Then you will have the best of both worlds. Modern digital and MF RF.
And developing color film isn't so bad. I just bought a water bath on eBay for $50.

Second the mamiya 7II comment

 

[mfogiel]

As usual, the most important differentiator, is if you shoot colour or B&W, and if you can live with digital B&W. If it is the case, in my opinion, if you are after technical detail vs ease of obtaining it, the digital is an obvious answer. Somebody even claims that D800E could be better than a Leica, but this can be probably true only if you use best lenses available for that mount.
For me, digital is not good enough, therefore I use B&W film. However, I believe that Mamiya would be a more technically proficient solution for rf photography than Plaubel, which only strong point is the f 2.8 aperture.

 

[flip]

As usual, the most important differentiator, is if you shoot colour or B&W, and if you can live with digital B&W. If it is the case, in my opinion, if you are after technical detail vs ease of obtaining it, the digital is an obvious answer. Somebody even claims that D800E could be better than a Leica, but this can be probably true only if you use best lenses available for that mount.
For me, digital is not good enough, therefore I use B&W film. However, I believe that Mamiya would be a more technically proficient solution for rf photography than Plaubel, which only strong point is the f 2.8 aperture.

If it matters, I was looking to the w67, one of which just went locally for about $1700US. Not exactly cheap, but not ebay pricey either. I suppose that implies that I could try it and decide to flip it if it didn't work out.

Portability is key as the kind of stuff I could see shooting MF is nature.

 

[flip]

Ok - I figured that life is short and I should try MF while the film is there to support it. Hell, I might even support the film!

I saw a Makina 67 with grip for a below-market price and pulled the trigger. 3 month warrantee. No hood. I see the hood and strap also on sale ($130 and $50 respectively) but not sure of the importance or value compared to OEM items.

Anyhow, I'm psyched. First MF! And there is still efke 25 and velvia 50 120 out there. The only issue is scanning - I don't dig the shop JPG option as I prefer raw. Not sure if there is a good alternative without going all in.

In any case, definitely going to take to the fall colors.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Does it make sense to go MF or M9? Yes.

Which? That's the difficult question...

I have both and use the M9 more but there are times when MF wins hands down.

Cheers,

R.

 

[jsrockit]

Well it sounds like you can buy a MF camera now but cannot buy the M9 yet... so, go for a MF camera, use it and then sell it when you are closer to M9 money (to put towards a M9 and if you end up thinking MF wasn't for you)).

 

[flip]

Yes. Correct.
:-D
I figure that if indecisive, I'll err toward experience over being cutting edge. Besides, I am not of the type to shoot oodles. So, there is some sense to a slow media option.

Any reason to sweat the hood? I expect that a modern Nikkor lens is not flare-prone even with the filter I will attach out of compulsion.

 

[fbf]

GIven the fact that Japan still has the best market for film user, I would give MF a try first.

 

[mfogiel]

It looks, like you mainly want to shoot colour. In this case:
1- do get a hood, even a rubber one, and avoid unnecessary filters
2- give preference to colour negative film - slides are more difficult to justify in the era of digital
3- work out, how much do you plan to shoot, and above all, print. If you only scan for the web, you can use a cheap flatbed lke Epson V700, if you want to print decent size, you need a better scanner . Nikon CS9000 or perhaps the new Plustek 120 at least.
4- If you only want to shoot slides, and scan on a cheap flatbed, I feel it would be a pure waste of time - you would get better results from a Nikon D600.

 

[flip]

It looks, like you mainly want to shoot colour. In this case:
1- do get a hood, even a rubber one, and avoid unnecessary filters
2- give preference to colour negative film - slides are more difficult to justify in the era of digital
3- work out, how much do you plan to shoot, and above all, print. If you only scan for the web, you can use a cheap flatbed lke Epson V700, if you want to print decent size, you need a better scanner . Nikon CS9000 or perhaps the new Plustek 120 at least.
4- If you only want to shoot slides, and scan on a cheap flatbed, I feel it would be a pure waste of time - you would get better results from a Nikon D600.

I do B&W at home, so that is also on the menu. However, I tend to shoot B&W on Leica.

Hood. Check.

Surprised by the negative film over slide comment.

I'll check those scanners.

Roger the limiting factor of a scanner.

Thanks,
P

 

[flip]

Gotta Love Japan.
Won on Monday afternoon. Received Wednesday.
Heavier than expected with the grip and the finder is a touch foggy, but the meter looks OK and RF as well. The size is awesome for me. Back and shoulder problems from carpal tunnel. This is good.

 

[jsrockit]

Congrats Flip.