Medium Format ... long may it live!

Don't believe everything you read

Don't believe everything you read

Keith,

In a word: Rubbish. I have been using mine on a tripod a lot. At 1 to 1/15 sec. No worries. Handheld, I try to stay around 1/250. MAYBE, if I looked at negatives with a microscope, I might think differently. But I don't.

EDIT TO ADD:

If it really bothers you, as someone pointed out earlier in this thread, shoot Delta 3200.

These were exposed at 1/8 sec, + or -, tripod, mirror lock up, firm hand on the prism. HP5+ @ 250. 45mm lens.

Gruene+Oct+2008+_2+of+5_.jpg



Gruene+Oct+2008+_1+of+5_.jpg


Handheld, TXP 320 @ 200. 150mm lens.


Weep+Angel+003-2.jpg


My Gallery has a lot of 6x7 photos. Gruene, TX and Cemeteries are all 6x7.

One more. Velvia 50. Tripod. Slow. 45mm lens around f/8.0 or f/11. The 45mm lens is habit forming.

Longhorn-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Great work all. I have really enjoyed this thread.

Columbia National Wildlife Refuge
November 2008
Mamiya 7ll w/43mm

Best regards,
 
Since scanning my old 6x6 negatives, I find myself cropping some of my rectangular negatives (35mm, 6x7 & 4x5) square. When it's right, square works.
 
I love shooting square as well. From the instant I hit the shutter on the camera which introduced me to the format, I was hooked. I wish there existed a 35mm camera with a "mini" square format. I know one can always crop, but it's jus not the same for me.

Great thread and very nice shots all!
 
downsampling

downsampling

As an aside but very much relevant to MF shooters wanting to maintain detail at all print sizes...

I find when I scan MF images at 4000dpi (Nikon 8000) and downsample for output at smaller print sizes (usually I use bicubic sharper when dowsampling) I get noticeably grainy prints, certainly not of MF quality. I usually shoot 400ISO so that accentuates the problem.

Do most people downsample for output using bicubic sharper, as most books etc tend to recommend? Or is standard bicubic better for film scans with a clear grain pattern?

Cheers.
 
Bicubic sharper is better as it retains detail that may otherwise be lost. I use a Minolta Multi Pro and the ScanHancer inserts, which eliminates ice clipping and smooths out the tonal range dramatically. I scan MF at 2400 dpi and downsize accordingly. I always apply Neat Image noise removal FIRST and then an element of capture sharpener. I find this provides me with grain free (almost) prints from XP2 at 320 iso. Periodically I also scan with my Epson V700 using the Betterscanning holders and ANR inserts and find grain very acceptable.
 
Keith said:
I'

Unfortunately I can also think of a few other MF cameras I'd like to own ... a Mamiya C330 comes to mind and possibly an RB67 ... a Hasselblad wouldn't go astray either. From what I can perceive used MF gear offers an incredible range of stunningly competent cameras and lenses at extrordinary value.


I posted this pic in my gallery last night but I'll post it again here ... f16 at at 1/60 sec ... difficult light but no flare from the Zenzanon lens ... I love this format!

Please show me some of your pics that have made you smile and think to yourself ... "Yep, I love MF!" 🙂
Click to expand...


Now I am going to have to do some more scanning. I sent off a couple of MF's to be sold, a Pentax 6x7, and one of my Fuji 6x9's, with the 100mm interchangeable lens. Let me know if you have any interest and I will reel them back.

I have a couple other Fuji's, & Zu does not want the Pentax, I had the Mamiya RZ but found it too heavy, plus I like the 6x9 format over the 6x7. An unusual Fuji 6x8 was around, the RF, not the "studio" 680, understand they were sold in Japan?

Maybe I can make it to Step 2 of the reduction in equipment program?

John

I did find one I scanned today, shot with the Fuji 645.
U25450I1246652664.SEQ.0.jpg
 
Last edited:
Wayne ... the article I was reading about the Pentax was on the Luminous Landscape site. He gives the camera a big wrap as he uses one himself regularly but was convinced that the beast needs a tripod approximately twice the weight or thereabouts of the camera itself ... I think he does look at images through a microscope though!

I'm attracted to the SLR in MF for the same reasons I am for 35mm ... as much as I love my Bronica RF645 I can't believe how vague the framelines are at any distance! I'm a little fanatical about framing and yes sure wtih the big negs a crop is easy but I still resent having to do it to reproduce the image the way I saw it in my viewfinder when I took the shot ... I know, it's just me! 😛

Maybe there is indeed a Hasselblad in my future for 6x6... that still leaves 6x4.5 ~ 6x7 and 6x9 to deal with. Oh my god, where does it all end? 😱 🙂
 
Last edited:
Keith said:
...

Maybe there is indeed a Hasselblad in my future for 6x6... that still leaves 6x4.5 ~ 6x7 and 6x9 to deal with. Oh my god, where does it all end? 😱 🙂
Click to expand...

It doesn't end, at least while you're having fun!

Did you notice the price has dropped, again, on the Hassy 503 in the classifieds? 😀

For the 645 may I recommend the Mamiya M645 1000s? Cheap as chips, solid as a rock, nice lenses, unusual ergonomics. Produces very nice negatives. The Pentax 645 is very highly recommended, but more expensive and less commonly available out our way.
 
ChrisN said:
It doesn't end, at least while you're having fun!

Did you notice the price has dropped, again, on the Hassy 503 in the classifieds? 😀

For the 645 may I recommend the Mamiya M645 1000s? Cheap as chips, solid as a rock, nice lenses, unusual ergonomics. Produces very nice negatives. The Pentax 645 is very highly recommended, but more expensive and less commonly available out our way.
Click to expand...


Chris ... I've had the Blad on my add 'watch list' since I spotted it ... but thanks for reminding me! 😀

I soooo would like that camera! 🙂
 
Keith said:
Chris ... I've had the Blad on my add 'watch list' since I spotted it ... but thanks for reminding me! 😀

I soooo would like that camera! 🙂
Click to expand...

Keith, you can shoot 645 with the Blad, you get 16 exposures, and you need a prism, but a well used prism is generally pretty reasonable. Careful not to buy the 4x4 back, unless you want to shoot super slides, but you can do that as well with the 645 back by cutting off the ends of the frame. I suppose the insert for the 645 would go in the 4x4 back. Mixed number backs are selling pretty low.

If you lurk around camera shows, and other disreputable locales, or bug Igor, you can find some amazing kit for very reasonable prices.

The Mamiya 1000s, though a bit tricky to service, are very sturdy, and I saw one the dealers were offering $125 for with a non meter prism, normal lens, in user shape. I have had several, and shutter adjustment was $125, they are electronically controlled. There is an assortment of prisms, some offer AE. They also take the Pentacon, Kiev, Exacta mount lenses with an adapter, opening them up as reliable bodies for a whole lot of Jena and FSU glass.

You can get in to some money with the lenses, but the newer models with interchangeable backs will take some digital backs, so the system is still alive.

I do hear MF is going up in price in general, as the rest of the world has not lost their minds entirely. ;-)

I watched a Bronica with two backs and three lenses sell for $300 in a fitted case.

Regards, John
 
I don't want to clutter up the forum with an 'about to pull the trigger' thread, so I'll ask here.
I'm looking at a Kiev 60 with both a wlf and ttl prism finder and an arsat 80 for about $100 shipped (provided there isn't a last minute bidding frenzy), any opinions/warnings?
 
Keith said:
Please show me some of your pics that have made you smile and think to yourself ... "Yep, I love MF!" 🙂
Click to expand...

Wish that I could shoot MF all the time... thanks for the great thread Keith!

Vince Donovan and Todd Hanz's photographs motivated me to start shooting MF. Thanks gentlemen!

attachment.php


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Scan-090531-0005.jpg
    Scan-090531-0005.jpg
    31.1 KB · Views: 2
  • Scan-090531-0004.jpg
    Scan-090531-0004.jpg
    43.4 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
For some reason that I can't explain, I enjoy shooting with my bulky, heavy RB67 more than any of my other gear. If I had to choose a camera for a "money shot" I guess I would choose my Nikon D300 but I enjoy the process more with my RB67. Maybe it makes me feel like I am a "real" photographer. I even like the sound of the "slap" of the mirror...I guess I am a bit nuts. I know one of the things RF folks love is the "quite" nature of their RF.
 
Jay Decker said:
Wish that I could shoot MF all the time... thanks for the great thread Keith!

Vince Donovan and Todd Hanz's photographs motivated me to start shooting MF. Thanks gentlemen!
Click to expand...

Thanks for your contribution Jay. I have to admit that on the odd occasion when my commitment to MF has waned a little ... an image I've spotted in the gallery or a thread by Todd has well and truly revived it!

His MF work is consistently outstanding IMO!

This thread has topped the 100 post mark ... RFF has a very strong core of MF shooters!

All great pics in this thread. 🙂
 
Last edited:
Keith,

I use a CF Gitzo 3 Series tripod and RRS BH-55 under the Pentax. Not exactly the lightest. Not cement heavy either. About 3 kilos all up. I also hang the heavy 6x7 bag from the tripod. As I mentioned earlier, left hand on the prism, index finger trips the mirror lock up, right hand trips the shutter with cable release. Very easy when you get the hang of it. I have also used the MLU hand held. Works fine for static subjects.

The Pentax 6x7 ground glass is not 100%. You get a little extra all around on the negative.

In the 6x7 world, there are few choices. The eyelevel handling of the Pentax wins in my book. Did I mention the 45mm lens? Brilliant!

I do wish I could afford something in 6x9.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom