Igor.Burshteyn
Well-known
I know there are many experienced MF users on RFF that's why I ask it here. With MF gear prices lowest I ever seen, and 120 film development still available, I decided I just need to try one. Background - in 135 format I am mainly OM user, and occasionally I enjoy shooting kiev and oly 35sp RFs as well, prefer 50mm or wider optics. Gear I am looking for should be usable both handheld and in the studio on tripod with studio lights. What MF system would you advise for MF beginner? The budget is $500.
MartinP
Veteran
In Europe I'd recommend a serviced and cleaned Pentacon Six, as they are good solid cameras with excellent optics from Zeiss or from Russian manufacturers. The system is also plentiful, and cheaply available from European merchants (eg.cupog) on the auction site. In earlier decades the P6 was the standard "workhorse" medium format camera for many east European countries.
The system has various viewfinders, bellows, lens manufacturers etc etc. so you will find it easy to put together the stuff you need. I am not sure of the economics of this choice if the gear has to be shipped to the US though.
It would be wise to find a serviced and guaranteed camera as the bodies are at least 15 - 20 years old now, but they are simple and tough.
A useful link would be www.pentaconsix.com.
The system has various viewfinders, bellows, lens manufacturers etc etc. so you will find it easy to put together the stuff you need. I am not sure of the economics of this choice if the gear has to be shipped to the US though.
It would be wise to find a serviced and guaranteed camera as the bodies are at least 15 - 20 years old now, but they are simple and tough.
A useful link would be www.pentaconsix.com.
mh2000
Well-known
If you like TLRs you can't go wrong with a Rollei or Yashica (google for the differences in models). Mamiya 645 is quite attractively priced... but a little small for MF. $500 is a little tight for a full setup on the more sought after cameras.
Ronald_H
Don't call me Ron
You could consider a Yashica Mat 124 TLR. Good optics but not really a system camera (no backs, interchangable lenses etc.) But can be found cheaply for your first MF adventures.
Hmmm, the sun is shining outside, maybe I should take mine outside to finish that first roll...
Hmmm, the sun is shining outside, maybe I should take mine outside to finish that first roll...
Igor.Burshteyn
Well-known
I hesitate to go this route due to reliability issues. Right now I have an option to get kiev-6c "new old stock" setup for less than 150$, but I want something that works out of the box without gambling. Though all these P6 CZJ lenses are tempting.
John Lawrence
Well-known
I started MF with a Mamiya C220 and found it an ideal introduction. They can still be found quite cheaply, and are pretty robust. I had no problems with mine, but did replace the foam seals before I sold it some ten years ago. There are a few for sale here:
http://www.fotofixuk.co.uk/used-mediumformat.html
http://www.fotofixuk.co.uk/used-mediumformat.html
elshaneo
Panographer
The Rolleicord Vb would be great as a start !!!
oftheherd
Veteran
Without going to the 'bay to see what prices are I would think a Mamiya C330 might fit the bill. They are hand holdable, if a little heavy, but would usually be used with a neck strap anyway, outside a studio. You can interchange lenses, and they have bellows for closeup. You can also get different viewfinders, including metered, but I don't know their availability now.
Of course, I always recommend Mamiya Universal/Super Press. Again system cameras. They are very hand holdable with anything less that the 500mm f/8. You can change lenses and backs, and use extension tubes and ground glass foucusing backs for closups. The lenses are all good.
What shape will you find them in? Mamiya cameras were always well made and hold up well. However, no matter what brand you get, don't be surprised if you have to get a cla or compensate for shutter speeds. The older and/or more used any camera is the more likely that is.
Good luck in your search.
Of course, I always recommend Mamiya Universal/Super Press. Again system cameras. They are very hand holdable with anything less that the 500mm f/8. You can change lenses and backs, and use extension tubes and ground glass foucusing backs for closups. The lenses are all good.
What shape will you find them in? Mamiya cameras were always well made and hold up well. However, no matter what brand you get, don't be surprised if you have to get a cla or compensate for shutter speeds. The older and/or more used any camera is the more likely that is.
Good luck in your search.
MartinP
Veteran
The Kiev cameras are bigger and heavier than the Pentacons, vibrate much more, are built to a lower standard overall and have a much less reliable shutter design. If you buy from one of the P6 specialists the cameras are serviced and collimated - and guaranteed. I have never had a problem with mine, indoors or out.
mfogiel
Veteran
No doubt, a Rolleiflex with a 75mm f3,5 lens - the T models come quite cheaply, make sure you get a serviced camera though.
Igor.Burshteyn
Well-known
It's almost 3x negative size from 35mm, that's quite enough MF for me.
I want camera with interchangeable backs (digital back some day...at least I can dream, can't I) so I rule out TLRs and other cameras that don't have interchangeable backs.
I rule out 6x7 cameras as they are too heavy to carry around.
This leaves me with 645 or 6x6 format, system camera options. Of all old Mamiyas, Bronicas and 'Blads out there - what would you recommend?
mfogiel
Veteran
Then get a Hasselblad, but your budget is somewhat limited, you might get a 500 EL/M with a 80/2.8 or 60/3,5 for a start. However, if you don't have a darkroom and don't have a good scanner, I'd skip MF in favour of a good lens or good scanner for 35mm, the results will be better.
eli griggs
Well-known
Another nod to the Hasselblad with an A12 back and an 80mm, though I'd hold out for a CM body, the EL/M is larger and I like the feel of the CM in hand. KEH has plenty of these and you can build on it as needed or opportunity presents.
You really should learn to develop your own b&w though, IMO, it's such an important skill and with all the free and almost free kit going spare nowadays, you could put together a nice, suitcase darkroom easily enough.
Cheers
You really should learn to develop your own b&w though, IMO, it's such an important skill and with all the free and almost free kit going spare nowadays, you could put together a nice, suitcase darkroom easily enough.
Cheers
Al Kaplan
Veteran
The Pentacon Six, alias Praktisix. is a nice camera. I had the 50, 80, 180, and 300mm Carl Zeiss Jena lenses for mine. Because of trademark restrictions they're called C.Z. Jena in some countries. They also made a 65mm and a 120mm. The longer lenses usually came supplied with an adapter to fit 35mm SLR's. Back around 1970 the cameras were so cheap that you could buy two bodies with prism finders and 80mm Biometer lenses for less than the price of a Hasselblad back.
On the down side they often had spacing problems with overlapping frames, the prism finders showed less than the film saw, and the X-synch speed was too slow, about 1/20 second. The meter prism was designed for the now banned mercury bateries.
For a good reliable twin lens reflex get a Minolta Autocord. The lens is as good or better than the Tessar on the Rolleiflex T. Unlike the Yashicamat it has a buttery smooth film advance. The Rollei and Yashica TLR's have the feed spool on the bottom so the film makes a right angle bend before getting to the film aperture. If you leave the camera with film in it for a day or two that "bent frame" on the roll won't lie flat in the film plane. The Minolta has the feed spool on the top. If you find a metered version of the Autocord or one of the Yashicas the odds are good that the meter is broken. Use it as an unmetered camera. You can probably buy it for a lot less than the unmetered version
On the down side they often had spacing problems with overlapping frames, the prism finders showed less than the film saw, and the X-synch speed was too slow, about 1/20 second. The meter prism was designed for the now banned mercury bateries.
For a good reliable twin lens reflex get a Minolta Autocord. The lens is as good or better than the Tessar on the Rolleiflex T. Unlike the Yashicamat it has a buttery smooth film advance. The Rollei and Yashica TLR's have the feed spool on the bottom so the film makes a right angle bend before getting to the film aperture. If you leave the camera with film in it for a day or two that "bent frame" on the roll won't lie flat in the film plane. The Minolta has the feed spool on the top. If you find a metered version of the Autocord or one of the Yashicas the odds are good that the meter is broken. Use it as an unmetered camera. You can probably buy it for a lot less than the unmetered version
Last edited:
kuzano
Veteran
Do you see square or do you see rectangular....
Do you see square or do you see rectangular....
The square format is quite hyped because you don't have to worry about the orientation of the camera.
However, it's the laziest format if that's your reason for using it. If you are ultimately going to produce your work in a rectangular format, then you are wasting film in a huge way. Fashion and event photographers created the rush to square format because they could snap off rolls of shots fast, and crop later. But the markets where most of them sold their work were rectangular markets, resulting in a lot of unused film area cropped and tossed.
Therefore, that is the first question you need to boil down an answer to in the MF decision.
If you feel that you are going to print or display your work as a final rectangle, then you will save big dollars on film by choosing:
1) the 645 format for 15 exposures on 120 or 30 exposures on 220. A real advantage to 6X4.5 will be a whole range of cameras that are not unlike the OM experience you have. SLR's, great rangefinders, and these will be cameras that dance easily between hand-held and sitting atop a tripod. Consider that 6X4.5 is 2.7 times the negative size of 35mm.
2) 6X7 or 6X9, will offer the more usable rectangle with 6X7 being a standard closest to standardized rectangular print. 6X7 will be 4X the size of 35mm. The cameras will be heavier, but again you will have an excellent range of SLR, and rangefinder cameras to choose from. Mirrors will be bigger and thus having the ability to Lockup the mirror will be a consideration. Locking up the mirror is not very usable for hand held, so consider that. With that in mind, the rangefinder style is a plus.
6X9 does start to renew the concern about wasted film as many processors are not equipped to print the 2:3 format large.
My two most strenuous objections to a twin lens camera are:
A) The square format, which for my shooting style wastes film.
B) Horrible studio camera because of the parallax issue. I did try one with the Paramender attachment, but that was just one more chore on correcting for the two inch difference between the viewing lens and the taking lens. That difference seems to occur more, and need compensation, in tight studio shooting.
My favorites for MF are Fuji 645 rangefinders, and Bronica ETRSi SLR 645's. For larger, I favor and use Fuji 690 rangefinders. I used a lot of Mamiya 645 and RB (6X7) and found those very nice, until I decided to move from focal plane shutters (Mamiya), to shutters in lenses (both Bronica in all formats and Fuji in all formats).
Over the years 645 has been the most productive format for me in terms of justifying film and per image processing expenses. It costs me $5.00 to process a roll of 120, no matter how many images are on the roll. Therefore 645 gives me twice the images for the same processing price as 6X9.
When I crop a 645 or a 6X9 that I composed for the format, I lose very little of the taken image. 6X6 had me always tossing an unjustifiable amount of the capture to get my rectangle.
So again.... answer, in your own mind, the square vs rectangle question.
Square is certainly a choice that seems to work for some.
Do you see square or do you see rectangular....
The square format is quite hyped because you don't have to worry about the orientation of the camera.
However, it's the laziest format if that's your reason for using it. If you are ultimately going to produce your work in a rectangular format, then you are wasting film in a huge way. Fashion and event photographers created the rush to square format because they could snap off rolls of shots fast, and crop later. But the markets where most of them sold their work were rectangular markets, resulting in a lot of unused film area cropped and tossed.
Therefore, that is the first question you need to boil down an answer to in the MF decision.
If you feel that you are going to print or display your work as a final rectangle, then you will save big dollars on film by choosing:
1) the 645 format for 15 exposures on 120 or 30 exposures on 220. A real advantage to 6X4.5 will be a whole range of cameras that are not unlike the OM experience you have. SLR's, great rangefinders, and these will be cameras that dance easily between hand-held and sitting atop a tripod. Consider that 6X4.5 is 2.7 times the negative size of 35mm.
2) 6X7 or 6X9, will offer the more usable rectangle with 6X7 being a standard closest to standardized rectangular print. 6X7 will be 4X the size of 35mm. The cameras will be heavier, but again you will have an excellent range of SLR, and rangefinder cameras to choose from. Mirrors will be bigger and thus having the ability to Lockup the mirror will be a consideration. Locking up the mirror is not very usable for hand held, so consider that. With that in mind, the rangefinder style is a plus.
6X9 does start to renew the concern about wasted film as many processors are not equipped to print the 2:3 format large.
My two most strenuous objections to a twin lens camera are:
A) The square format, which for my shooting style wastes film.
B) Horrible studio camera because of the parallax issue. I did try one with the Paramender attachment, but that was just one more chore on correcting for the two inch difference between the viewing lens and the taking lens. That difference seems to occur more, and need compensation, in tight studio shooting.
My favorites for MF are Fuji 645 rangefinders, and Bronica ETRSi SLR 645's. For larger, I favor and use Fuji 690 rangefinders. I used a lot of Mamiya 645 and RB (6X7) and found those very nice, until I decided to move from focal plane shutters (Mamiya), to shutters in lenses (both Bronica in all formats and Fuji in all formats).
Over the years 645 has been the most productive format for me in terms of justifying film and per image processing expenses. It costs me $5.00 to process a roll of 120, no matter how many images are on the roll. Therefore 645 gives me twice the images for the same processing price as 6X9.
When I crop a 645 or a 6X9 that I composed for the format, I lose very little of the taken image. 6X6 had me always tossing an unjustifiable amount of the capture to get my rectangle.
So again.... answer, in your own mind, the square vs rectangle question.
Square is certainly a choice that seems to work for some.
BSchall
Established
I highly recommend a Bronica SQA outfit. For $500 you can get a body, finder, back and a couple of great lenses. You can get a 6x6 back for when you feel square, and a 645 back when you're not. You can have a WL finder or a prism finder, with or without a meter. I've been shooting a SQA for years and never had a problem. And now they are fairly inexpensive, and very common.
gb hill
Veteran
I'm thinking of getting my first MF camera. My Holga don't count, I looked at a Bronica SQ camera. Not sure of which series. Some have lock up mirrors, some don't I found out. It was a nice camera to hold The 80/2.5 is standard. I saw some WA lenses for a great price on KEH website. The backs are cheap also. I think I'm going to go the Bronica route. I have a post in the evil slr section about them.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
you can sang a mint Mamiya C330 with 80mm/2.8 lens for $400<. This handheld or tripod camera. Optics excellent.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
An unsung advantage of square format is when doing flash on the camera photography. A number of companies have made brackets that will hold the flash directly above the lens so the shadow dissapears behind the subject. A rectangular format requires a swinging arm on the bracket to keep the flash head over the lens when you go from vertical to horizontal.
eli griggs
Well-known
I have a Minolta Autocord 'export' model and it's quite nice and I'd snatch up another if I could on the cheap, but it is a fixed lens camera so the 'blad is still closer to what you said you'd want.
One of the things I liked most about my old setup was the auto bellows with an older 135mm lens. The Minolta can't get you close enough IMO for small objects without serious cropping the negative.
Cheers
One of the things I liked most about my old setup was the auto bellows with an older 135mm lens. The Minolta can't get you close enough IMO for small objects without serious cropping the negative.
Cheers