Medium Format Upgrade, Gear Advice!

[Ronald M]

Hasselblad V.

As an add on to large Elliot Erwitt print, my Leica dealer had a 3x5 foot sample print from color neg of the day, 1980`s, and it was beautiful.

Ektar 25 was wonderful, but long gone, perhaps 30 years. You could wear your nose out sniffing grain.

The higher MP digital cameras make film look like a distant cousin. 800 series Nikon would be one. I have done prints from my 2006 D200 at 11x14 with a cheap Nikon lens that were better than I ever got from medium format. I made shockingly good prints from a 6 MP Nikon D40.

 

[sevo]

Ektar 25 was wonderful, but long gone, perhaps 30 years.

It was only introduced 27 years ago, and cancelled 19 years ago. Its low dynamic range killed it in the market - habitual CN film users had difficulties handling it, and slide film users saw little reason to switch to a CN film behaving like slide, unless they had clients that explicitly requested CN.

 

[EdSawyer]

I disagree re: Ektar 25. I shot a ton of that and still have piles in the freezer. It was a great film, still is, it had plenty of dynamic range (more than slide film by far), extremely fine grain, and great color. Even a great portrait film too. Really it's only downside was speed, and that more than anything was probably what made it a difficult sell in the market place. It was also the most complex film Kodak coated at the time, from what I have read. Current Ektar 100 is a great substitute and hopefully will be available a long time.

BTW, for your medium format foray, I'd suggest the Mamiya 7 system.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hasselblad V.

As an add on to large Elliot Erwitt print, my Leica dealer had a 3x5 foot sample print from color neg of the day, 1980`s, and it was beautiful.

Ektar 25 was wonderful, but long gone, perhaps 30 years. You could wear your nose out sniffing grain.

The higher MP digital cameras make film look like a distant cousin. 800 series Nikon would be one. I have done prints from my 2006 D200 at 11x14 with a cheap Nikon lens that were better than I ever got from medium format. I made shockingly good prints from a 6 MP Nikon D40.

Once again, our experiences are very different. Lens resolution alone limits "full frame" digital. Assume that you need 8 lp/mm on the print for ultimate resolution, and a 36x60 inch print needs well over 250 lp/mm even with a perfect enlarger lens. Ain't gonna happen.

I agree that high-res digital can be amazingly good, but it can't really begin to match (say) 6x7cm film, where a 36x60 inch print is about 12x. Admittedly film flatness means that 96 lp/mm is unusual on roll film but it is not unknown.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Dpingr1]

Don't forget "baby" Linhofs: stunning quality, rangefinders, and movements. As for choosing a format, you might care to look at http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/medium formats.html

Or there's always large format... See http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps large.html

Cheers,

R.

And of course, you can have both large and medium formats in one camera. My first medium format camera was my 4x5 Crown Graphic with 6x6 back. With the right hat, you look like Weegee too. The smaller Century Graphic is a cool little camera too -- a less expensive alternative to the Baby Linhof. http://www.graflex.org/

 

[Roger Hicks]

And of course, you can have both large and medium formats in one camera. My first medium format camera was my 4x5 Crown Graphic with 6x6 back. With the right hat, you look like Weegee too. The smaller Century Graphic is a cool little camera too -- a less expensive alternative to the Baby Linhof. http://www.graflex.org/

No, the "babies" won't take 4x5. That's why they're called "baby" Linhofs...

See (for example) https://cameraquest.com/lint369.htm from our Beloved Helmsman, Chairman and Leader

Cheers,

R.

 

[Bill Clark]

Found this on Facebook with a link thinkng it gives a view on medium formant film versus digital:

http://petapixel.com/2016/06/01/analog-vs-digital-look-photo-taken-15-years-apart/

Notice with the film version the twin towers are still standing.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

That's OK, Roger, I'd still love a 6x9 Technika. If I knew then what I know now about cameras in general and medium format in particular, I might have bought one instead of my Hasselblad. I'd say they're still excellent value coming up for $1000 or even less depending on lenses etc. but I don't want to encourage prices up out of reach. So really, they're awful things, and nobody should ever buy them.

I'm always reminded of Ivor's remarks about them in his first "Collecting..." book:

"A Linhof 'Baby' Technika IV 6cm X 9cm technical camera is a beguiling instrument capable of first-class results in expert hands, but also of equally outstanding disasters if the photographer has not learned how to use the camera properly."​

For some reason, this only makes me want one even more.

 

[jojoman2]

check out my wide angle rolleiflex shots. It's a great camera because it feels somewhere between 28mm and 35mm, not too wide, not too long.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

check out my wide angle rolleiflex shots. It's a great camera because it feels somewhere between 28mm and 35mm, not too wide, not too long.

Indeed, but for both the original poster and many of us (not least myself, sadly) also somewhat in excess of their budget. 😉

 

[jojoman2]

Indeed, but for both the original poster and many of us (not least myself, sadly) also somewhat in excess of their budget. 😉

haha totally understandable. It is indeed beyond my own budget, sadly, which is why I'm dropping subtle hints that there might be one for sale 😉

 

[jojoman2]

I can heartily endorse the fuji GF series. I was lucky enough to use one for a few weeks

 

[Roger Hicks]

That's OK, Roger, I'd still love a 6x9 Technika. If I knew then what I know now about cameras in general and medium format in particular, I might have bought one instead of my Hasselblad. I'd say they're still excellent value coming up for $1000 or even less depending on lenses etc. but I don't want to encourage prices up out of reach. So really, they're awful things, and nobody should ever buy them.

I'm always reminded of Ivor's remarks about them in his first "Collecting..." book:

"A Linhof 'Baby' Technika IV 6cm X 9cm technical camera is a beguiling instrument capable of first-class results in expert hands, but also of equally outstanding disasters if the photographer has not learned how to use the camera properly."​

For some reason, this only makes me want one even more.

Elegantly phrased!

Cheers,

R.

 

[oftheherd]

Mamiya Press? It's big, but it's 6x9 and a rangefinder with excellent lenses (75mm, 100mm f/2.8 for example).

It is great, with a fine selection of lenses from 50mm to 250mm, extension tubes, different format backs, cut film capable. Big? Yes, and heavy. And as good as the 250mm lens is, it requires two men and a boy to carry around. But I like mine.

Don't forget "baby" Linhofs: stunning quality, rangefinders, and movements. As for choosing a format, you might care to look at http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/medium formats.html

Or there's always large format... See http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps large.html

Cheers,

R.

Mr. Hicks is always quick to tout baby Linhofs. I don't always think it can cost effective over other solutions, but I think he might be right this time, including suggesting LF.

But you might want to consider 9x12 for large format. It can't tie itself in sailor's knots, but that is over rated for most photography. Most 9x12 have rise and fall, and many have shift. Their lenses may not always be as good as modern lenses, but they aren't bad. They are usually lighter than 4x5, and can be found with RF. They will also accommodate 6x6 to 6x9 backs. Only two or three brands had interchangeable lenses, and they were limited in focal length, but aux lenses can still be found fairly inexpensively on ebay. If 9x12 is too big, there are 6x9 press style cameras also.

Besides taking pretty good photos, old press style cameras have another advantage in being somewhat inexpensive overall.

 

[Jake Mongey]

One more suggestion for a TLR would be the Minolta autocord which has amazing optics which could rival the equiv lent rollei and can be had for a fraction of the price. Just make sure you get the seller to fully check the aperture lever as this commonly gets stuck (mine is stuck at f8)

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . But you might want to consider 9x12 for large format. . . .

If a 9x12 camera takes standardized holders, it also takes 4x5 inch.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

One more suggestion for a TLR would be the Minolta autocord which has amazing optics which could rival the equiv lent rollei and can be had for a fraction of the price. Just make sure you get the seller to fully check the aperture lever as this commonly gets stuck (mine is stuck at f8)

Dear Jake,

Seconded. A friend got a 48-sheet advertising poster off his.

Cheers,

R.

 

[streetshoot]

I truly appreciate all the feedback guys, and have decided to go with the Mamiya 6 and fortunately one fell in to my lap from a fellow rangefinder user for a reasonable price!

 

[oftheherd]

I truly appreciate all the feedback guys, and have decided to go with the Mamiya 6 and fortunately one fell in to my lap from a fellow rangefinder user for a reasonable price!

I am no longer a big fan of 6x6 except in the older folders, but it is hard to find a disgruntled user of the Mamiya 6