MF SLRs: Prism or Waist Level finder?

[sevo]

It really varies with the camera.For the 6x7 and up SLRs I don't have prism finders - as far as I know there never were any for Graflexes or the Reflex Primar, and there only are mirror finders (reversing the image top down) for the Mentors. In any case, I have no desire to lift a 2kg+ camera to eye level. In 6x4.5 I tend to use the M645pro with prism and winder, pretty much like a 35mm SLR, while I haven't had a prism on the M645/1000s for eight years.

 

[venchka]

Both. Prism on the Pentax 6x7. The camera is set up for a prism. At times I would like to have a stovepipe WLF/Magnifier. WLF on the Hasselblad. The camera came that way. I don't think I will spend money to change it.

 

[Beemermark]

On the 6x6 format I also find the composition of shooting people from waist level a lot more pleasing.

 

[jamais]

I had a Bronica ETR with WLF and AE-prism finder. I sold the prism finder and didn't look back a second. I do 85% of my work in 6x4,5. Portrait orientation on a tripod is not a problem but I much prefer landscape orientation anyway - even for portraiture. The WLF helps me to keep the equipment light and compact, as does the "small" MF.

 

[Sjixxxy]

I love WLF for street shooting. Making eye contact with someone, and then breaking that contact to bring a camera up to my eye I find painfully difficult. If I'm just looking down at the ground, and a viewfinder just happens to be there, I find it much much easier.

 

[rxmd]

With rectangular format, 645 or 6x7, how can you shoot a vertical?

Well to be honest even with a prism finder many 645s still make you feel like a dork when you want to shoot a vertical.

 

[narsuitus]

If you have a medium format SLR, what kind of finder do you use? Prism, Waist level, Sports? Something I'm not familiar with?

For studio work, full-length portraits, and close-ups, I prefer a waist level finder with a 6x6cm medium format camera.

For actions shots, I prefer a prism view finder.

I also tried a porro finder (uses mirrors instead of a full glass pentaprism) but found it unsatisfactory because it was too hard for me to focus on the small dark image.

 

[Merkin]

For me, it depends on the film format. For 6x6, i prefer a wlf. For 645, however, I prefer a prism, so I can go vertical more easily.

 

[zenza]

I started out using a prism and finally got a deal on a WLF. I haven't touched the prism since. Looking into a WLF is so much more appealing.

 

[sjw617]

I could never get used to a waist level so I got a Prisim for the ETRsi I had. Worked great for me until I decided that 645 was not for me. I found it to be too close to 35mm and went to the 617 and have been very happy since.

Steve

 

[Doug]

Opinion is certainly well-divided on this issue!

 

[Wayne R. Scott]

On my Bronica ETRS I use a rotary prism viewfinder. It is easier for me to use when the camera is on a tripod up high or down low.
Like this one:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....188&ih=019&category=3350&ssPageName=WDVW&rd=1

Wayne

 

[andredossantos]

WLF all the way. Love the low angle perspective and never was comfortable bringing a huge MF camera Like a hasselblad up to my eye.

 

[David R Munson]

I voted "other" because it depends on the camera. On a square-format camera or one with a rotating back like an RB67, a waist-level finder is usually fine. However, with something like a 645 I find a prism absolutely necessary, as shooting vertical shots without it is hilariously awkward.

 

[paulfish4570]

wlf is great for close-up, low-level work ...

 

[Spanik]

As I cannot focus a waist level finder without bringing it to my eye and use the loupe it is far easier to use a prism. And then you have a meter, diopter correction and don't have to do yoga to use a M645 in portrait.

The only time I remove the prism is when putting the camera on the ground to shoot at the ceiling. (*) But I don't carry the wlf for those 2 times a year, just take the prism off.

(*) yes, I have lain on my back in cathedrals getting funny looks from all around.

 

[Godfrey]

Simply put: If you have a medium format SLR, what kind of finder do you use? Prism, Waist level, Sports? Something I'm not familiar with?

With 645 and 6x7-6x9 cameras, waist level finders are less useful due to the clumsiness of turning the camera for portrait orientation (unless you have a rotating back like the RB67). With all medium format cameras, prism finders are large and heavy.

When I worked with the Hasselblad 500CM, I had WLF, magnifying Chimney finder, and 45 degree prism. The shape and control layout on the camera made WLF and chimney finders easy to work with; prisms were good, best once I fitted a side grip.

I had prism finders for Mamiya C330 and Rolleiflex TLRs, but used them rarely due to their size and weight. With either, a pistol grip was pretty much essential for good stability hand-held.

With the Hasselblad SWC, I use the groundglass back for critical focus on copy stand and on tripod setups. I switch between chimney finder and 45 degree prism depending on the subject matter and the situation. Speed of operation and proper orientation of the ground glass are obviously of little concern with this camera used this way... you're not going to be racing through a set up anyway.

When I had the Mamiya 645 1000S camera, I had both prism and waist level finders. Never used the waist level, it was simply too clumsy in use. The prism worked well, especially with the pistol grip.

G

 

[benlees]

WLF for me (6x6), though I do have a prism. Usually if I need the prism it means I left it at home.

 

[thegman]

Generally, I prefer to hold a camera to my face, except when using tripods. However, I don't like the bulk a prism adds to a Hasselblad or Rollei, so never thought to get one.

 

[mfogiel]

For landscape and architecture/close up, the WLF is good, as it let's you see the composition better and with the loupe you can set the sharpness more precisely. For everything else the prism is more natural, particularly portraiture.