My entrance to medium format

I had a Rapid 200 once, with a couple of backs. Loved it, once I figured out how to set the start point on the film. Sold it a few years ago to a friend of mine, who still has it and shoots it occasionally. I'll have to talk him into selling it back one day.

PF
 
Dave, sorry, I didn't know TLRgraphy and never wrote anything for them, so it must be someone else…

The only articles I wrote for a photo website are in french (you may not be able to read them but the photos are talking for themselves) : this one, this one and this one ;)

But thanks to let me discover another website about TLR ! :)
 
Just picked up my first TLR (Autocord) an also agree its one of the easiest cameras I've ever handled.
 
Dave Jenkins said:
You should not buy a TLR without first handling one.
Click to expand...

Theoretically agreed, but sadly, some of us live in places without good used camera shops, so handling a TLR (or anything besides a new digital plastic thingie) before buying requires driving to some faraway town or waiting and hoping that a TLR will randomly appear on Craigslist. Outside NYC, one could take the plunge on an eBay or KEH TLR, without handling it first, on one of the brands with somewhat less cult following than Rolleis or the Autocord (e.g. Ricoh, Meopta, or even a total no-name) or one of the older Yashica models with less collector demand (so, not a 124/124G). It should be possible to get into one for less than USD 100 and out of it for same (less shipping costs) if one doesn't get on well with it. (Or if one does get on well with it and graduates to a Rolleiflex. :))

--Dave
 
Square, square, square, square square. You don't have to flip the camera around for vertical shots, you can crop to a 6x4.5 but are not stuck with that size, and you might find the square format to your liking un-cropped.

TLR is probably the cheapest way to go, but can you deal with the lateral inversion? The same inversion exists with waist level finders of Hasselblads or Bronicas. Square format Bronicas can be got pretty cheaply, but watch out for the focal plane shutter models. That shutter could be used as a guillotine. As with Hasselblad, the modular system lets you switch film by just switching out backs, nice if shooting situations change.
 
I just bought a Mamiya m645 1000s with the waist level viewfinder and am absolutely loving it so far. It is built like a tank and many accessories are still available for super cheap. Here is a sample from my first roll:

220419_10100744408451675_1211824533_o.jpg
 
If you get used to the horizontally mirrored image, TLRs are cool.
The feature I like most, just like with rangefinders is, that you can mount a colored filter for black&white photography on the taking lens, and still have a clear view through the viewing lens.

I only do B&W with rangefinders and TLRs, and color with SLRs (because I can judge polarizers and that easily with SLRs, but a heavy orange filter darkens the view of an SLR too much).

I own two TLRs. A Ricoh Diacord L and a Yashica-Mat 124G
The Yashica-Mat is more modern, has a single crank for film advance and cranking the shutter as well as providing you with a rudimentary light meter. The Yashica-Mat has a f2.8 viewing lens making for a bright, snappy viewfinder. I replaced the Matte with one from Rich Oleson (that has a split screen) and this was a very easy process.

Still I prefer the simpler Ricoh. It is just as sharp, the lever focusing is nicer than the Rolleiflex-like dial on the Yashica, it feels better made and it has a certain something that the 30 years younger Yashica lacks to me. Technically, the Yashica is superior in every regard, of course :)
 
Better yet, try a Ricohmatic 225. Combines Rollei-style single crank film advance and shutter charging with Ricoh-style dual lever focusing. Best of both worlds, and the Rikenon lens is as good a tessar-type lens as any. Better internal baffling and flatter film path. And unlike Zeiss and Rollei selenium meters, the Japanese selenium cells tend to be still working fine. The top model Ricoh TLR, much under appreciated.
 
The C220 is the lighter of the Cxxx series. But it doesn't have a coupled advance and shutter cocking. Also no paralax indication. An 105 isn't the standard lens as well, but that should be an issue either. It is a good lens but more to the long side. Depends on what you want to do.

The 645 on the other hand has a metering prism (no idea wich one, there are several) but it isn't a version with a separate back.

Both are capable camera's and both are part of a system. So you can expand the camera after you know where you want to take it.

The Cxxx is for me the perfect TLR as it offers both wides and tele's (55mm to 250mm). You also have a leaf shutter so synch to 1/500 is possible. There are also (metered) prisms (but rather dim). But heavy compared to a fixed lens TLR.

The m645 has a very wide range of excellent lenses going from 24mm to 500mm. With it come the advantages of an SLR (easy macro, upright image) and the disadvantages of focal plane shutter (synch at 1/60, mirror slap) and the brick isn't easy to use in portrait mode without a grip.

It is hard to recommend you as they are 2 very different camera's. I have both of them and don't use them interchangably.
 
From the wording of the ads, I think that it's the same seller for both cameras, you could probably confirm this and might be able to handle both.

They're both good solid cameras, the 105DS lens on the TLR is quite good. The way both cameras handle is quite different, so I think it might be purely personal preference of the body format, viewing, and square vs. rectangle.

The 645 is slightly more "modern" if I can use that term. It at least cocks the shutter as you wind film. It will prevent user error a little better than the TLR will.
 
When I clicked through to the C220 ad, I was intrigued by the 105 DS lens and was going to mention that it is the only Mamiya TLR lens with an iris in the viewing lens to enable depth of field preview. And that this feature might make it a good lens to help you learn medium format, even though 105 is slightly long (as Spanik noted) and most people would start with the standard 80 mm. However, upon looking at the pix, I think it is not the DS lens. There were regular (non-DOF-previewing) 105 mm lenses for these TLRs as well. I think that's what this is, as I see no f-stop markings on this viewing lens and no "DS" red text on the lens bezel. Haggle accordingly if you go with this camera!
--Dave
 
angelopartemi said:
I just bought a Mamiya m645 1000s with the waist level viewfinder and am absolutely loving it so far. It is built like a tank and many accessories are still available for super cheap. Here is a sample from my first roll:
Click to expand...

They are nice SLR cameras, but inappropriate for posting in this TLR forum.
 
thegman said:
In terms of resolution, *35mm* film can outperform full frame digital sometimes:

http://www.twinlenslife.com/2011/01/digital-vs-film-canon-5d-mark-ii-vs.html

Of course, the 5D Mk II is no longer state of the art, and this comparison is with ISO 100 film, even at ISO 400, I think the tables would turn quickly and decisively in favour of digital.

So with that in mind, medium format, given a decent lens etc, should be able to very easily outresolve a full frame digital, although I'd imagine a D800 is pretty close. So many factors involved of course, you can find results on the internet to show the opposite.

Garry
Click to expand...

Film can be drum scanned as high as 10,000 ppi. I'd say that will outperform digital any day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom