Help me choose a medium format SLR

[KoNickon]

I also like the Mamiya 645J, which is a good second body if you don't need mirror lockup. The 1000s is the only choice if you need the 1/1000 speed since the 645 and 645J only go to 1/500.

As Monz said, this is a compact and lightweight system, even with one of the prism finders.

 

[Burlap Jacket]

The Mamiya M645 Super and Pro TL both use interchangable backs. The Super is an outstanding value.

 

[dspeltz]

I really like the interchangeable backs on the Hassie. And the lens are terrific. And the price is right.

 

[cmedin]

I find I don't use them all that often, much less than I thought I would before I got my medium format gear. YMMV.

Philipp

On the cameras I've had / have with interchangable backs I've found the same. Just mentioned it since the original post had it as one requirement.

 

[oscroft]

Personally, I've found interchangeable backs essential. For one thing, it would take me too long to reload if I had to fiddle with film inserts, so I always carry the next one pre-loaded. And secondly, being able to change film mid-roll (and so, for example, shoot both colour and b&w with just one body) is wonderful.

 

[eli griggs]

I know this is contrary to most of the advice your receiving but the Hasselblad 500cm is a great camera and if you could swing a basic outfit I believe you'll be happy with the choice, even if you have to grow your selection of lenses more slowly than with the Mamiya or a Bronica. The glass is top notch and you can use a waist level finder to start out.

A pair of A-12 backs, a good meter and a rapid wind crank and your on your way.

Eli

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

I want:

1. mirror up function (important. I want to use it for macro)
2. cheap lens options (kind of rules out Rollei & Hassy)
3. interchangeable backs

Meter not important because I do quite a lot of B&W work.

Then there is one thing I can't decide upon: focal plane shutter or leaf shutter?
I was thinking focal plane shutter because of the ability to adapt various lenses to the body.

I am also unsure of just how important is the mirror lock up function. I come from the land of 135 SLR (and RF) and the lack of mirror lock up there doesn't seem to be a problem, but then I have heard that mirror slap is a BIG problem for medium format.

Ideas and suggestions are more than welcome.

Since you already own a couple of FSU cameras, a Kiev-88CM MLU could be a good choice, perhaps in the Arax-MLU form. The Arax-branded Kiev-88's are reasonably reliable. The Pentacon Six mount lenses are dirt cheap and even the FSU lenses are generally of quite good optical quality. Nowadays you can probably get a used Mamiya, Bronica or even a Hassy for the same price, but the lenses will still be much more expensive. You can buy three used FSU lenses for much less than a one lens for a Bronica or Hassy and chances are that at least one of them will work mechanically as well. And of course the CZJ lenses are not much more expensive either, but they are much more reliable mechanically.

You can also use the same lenses in a Kiev/Arax-60, which in my opinion is a better choice for field work than other 6x6 SLR cameras. The "oversized" 35 mm SLR body is much more comfortable to carry around than a Bronica or Hassy, let alone any 6x7 camera. The Arax-60 is quite reliable, since the basic design of the Kiev-60 is sound; in fact better than the original Pentacon Six. There was nothing wrong with Soviet engineering; it was the manufacturing quality control that sucked. 🙄

 

[aizan]

once you bite into medium format, you're probably going to want a lighter camera to complement your slr. you may find it useful to consider your kit in pairs. if you'd like a rolleiflex, go with the hasselblad or rolleis (better build, too). bronica rf645? bronica etrsi. mamiya 7? rz67 pro ii. you get the idea.

 

[venchka]

Pentax 6x7?

"Bueller? Bueller? Anybody?"

 

[DougK]

Wayne has a point... a Pentax system would be a good choice, although it would not meet your removable back criteria.

 

[fawate]

I entered the medium format some years ago with a Hasselblad 501CM and a 80mm lens. While it is a wonderful camera and relatively affordable nowadays, its lenses are still very expensive. So, I am also looking for another system, even if I am not quitting the Hassy. I believe that a Pentax 645 can be a very interesting option. It has auto focus on the more recent models (645N and 645NII), its lenses are certainly cheaper than the ones made by Carl Zeiss, it is a reasonably light camera (for medium format standards). I believe that only the 645NII has mirror lockup because I haven´t found any references in the manual of the 645N. It does not fit your criteria of removable backs, however.

 

[JohnL]

Mamiya RB67.
Has all you want and is too cheap these days.
Get a body and a 140mm macro and maybe an extension ring. You'll be amazed what this set up can deliver.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema

I second the RB67. I recently got a used one with the standard 127mm lens for less than $700 in excellent condition. Used lenses for this camera are now so cheap that the cost of the interlens shutter becomes a non-issue, and using mirror lockup, the actual shutter release is almost inaudible.

 

[stuken]

Pentax 645, although no removable back, is a great camera with tack sharp SMC glass for cheap. Bronica SQA is what I have been using for a while and can highly reccomend it to anybody. My only qualm was that you cannot use it without a battery (I lie, you can still shoot, but you only get 1/500). The brass gears in my film back gave out, and I have a rollei and a yashica tlr, so I will probably be putting it up on the bay soon.

 

[cary]

You might want to look at the Bronica ETRSi. I used one for 15 years, shooting 5-15 rolls a days without a problem. Used the camera for everything from magazine covers to nuclear tests.

Cary

 

[cmedin]

I second the RB67. I recently got a used one with the standard 127mm lens for less than $700 in excellent condition. Used lenses for this camera are now so cheap that the cost of the interlens shutter becomes a non-issue, and using mirror lockup, the actual shutter release is almost inaudible.

They've gotten a lot cheaper lately. Check out these recently closed auctions:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Mamiya-RB67-out...oryZ3352QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Mamiya-RB67-Med...oryZ3352QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/MAMIYA-RB67-MED...oryZ3352QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Even KEH has them reasonably priced. When I was looking for one a while back I priced out a BGN condition setup w/ 90mm, WLF and 120 back for $280 or so.

 

[BillBingham2]

If it had to be an SLR and not a 'Blad, I would go with an RB67. She is a big camera but fun to use.

Does anyone make a digital back for them?

B2 (;->

 

[Anupam]

If macro is important at all I'd say MLU is essential and would strongly prefer a focal plane shutter. Macro lets you use a wide variety of lenses in barrel and without a focal plane shutter you will be stranded with only the manufacturers lenses.

-A

 

[aizan]

they make a digital back for the rz67 pro iid. the older versions are also a good choice for macro because of the bellows focusing.

 

[venchka]

Second body

Second body

Wayne has a point... a Pentax system would be a good choice, although it would not meet your removable back criteria.

A second body & prism would be cheap. The Pentax shoots 120 OR 220 with a flip of a switch. The 45mm & new 55mm lenses are fabulous and cheap. The 105, 150 & 160 are FAST & Cheap, "just like your first wife, Vern." The 150/2.8 optical diagram sure resembles a Sonnar. There are worse things to put in front of film. Make sure you get the MLU version. The earliest bodies didn't have that feature. A set of extension tubes for macro are less than $100 and work with all lenses from 45mm to 300mm. The 45mm lens on the 6x7 negative gives the same look as the Hasselblad XPan+45mm lens with infinite cropping variations.

 

[rxmd]

Since you already own a couple of FSU cameras, a Kiev-88CM MLU could be a good choice, perhaps in the Arax-MLU form. The Arax-branded Kiev-88's are reasonably reliable.

Seconded the choice of Arax-modified Kiev 88's. I have a 1985 Kiev 88 that I bought on the flea market here in Tashkent and had it overhauled by Arax - mainly a Pentacon Six bayonet installed and the shutter mechanism given a general fix-up. Arax did good work on that. The P6 bayonet had some problems with fat lenses like the 180 Sonnar; I had to file down the teeth on the bayonet a little bit to make the Sonnar fit. No problems otherwise.

I'm not sure if adding mirror lockup to a Kiev body is a good idea, however. The problem with Kiev 88s appears to be the complexity of the shutter and winding mechanism. Adding extra complexity to this mechanism by adding MLU can lead to problems. For example, there still is the rumour that the Kiev 88 breaks if you turn the shutter speed dial the wrong way; this rumour stemmed from a particular variant of the aftermarket MLU modification which indeed broke if you did that, on unmodified cameras there was no such problem. But then, everybody has its own theory about the source of the 88's supposed unreliability.

My own Kiev doesn't have MLU; I don't work with a tripod all that much, and for everything else it only results in an awkward workflow. Instead of MLU I would prefer a 645 camera with a leaf-shutter lens (for flash and for less vibrations). It would also allow me to continue using my existing Zeiss Jena lenses.

You can also use the same lenses in a Kiev/Arax-60, which in my opinion is a better choice for field work than other 6x6 SLR cameras. The "oversized" 35 mm SLR body is much more comfortable to carry around than a Bronica or Hassy, let alone any 6x7 camera. The Arax-60 is quite reliable, since the basic design of the Kiev-60 is sound; in fact better than the original Pentacon Six.

Seconded that suggestion. The whole point about the Kiev 88 or 60 is using the East German Zeiss lenses, which are very good and extremely cheap. (New Zeiss or Japanese lenses are probably better, but they cost fifteen times as much.) For those lenses the Kiev 60 is simply the better body; it's simpler, better-designed, has better ergonomics and is cheaper. If you spend a little time looking, you can get a Kiev 60, a Flektogon 50/4 and a Sonnar 180/2.8 together for 250 EUR; it's still hard to beat that in the medium format SLR world, even though with dropping Bronica and Mamiya prices those are coming close.

Philipp