harpofreely
Well-known
As I continue to drift away from 35mm to medium format and fuji x w/ legacy lenses, I finally sold my Leica M2. The truth is, I never loved it as much as my beat-up iiic.
My new go-to rangefinder? An original Koni-Omega Rapid. Half-way through the first roll with that 5lb brutalist hunk of metal, I was in love. An amazingly well-thought-out device, however homely, and at $125 in very well-sorted order, leaves a lot of film money for cranking out those glorious big negs.
Still very much on the fence about parting with my last M-mount lens, however - a 50mm Summicron collapsable with _zero_ front element marks or other glass issues. It might well sit on the shelf until a used Monochrom becomes a possibility...
My new go-to rangefinder? An original Koni-Omega Rapid. Half-way through the first roll with that 5lb brutalist hunk of metal, I was in love. An amazingly well-thought-out device, however homely, and at $125 in very well-sorted order, leaves a lot of film money for cranking out those glorious big negs.
Still very much on the fence about parting with my last M-mount lens, however - a 50mm Summicron collapsable with _zero_ front element marks or other glass issues. It might well sit on the shelf until a used Monochrom becomes a possibility...
B-9
Devin Bro
Sweet!
Ide keep the cron to, never know when you'll get that itch again!
Goodluck!
Ide keep the cron to, never know when you'll get that itch again!
Goodluck!
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Yep, you need MF for sure to match Cron quality... 
FrankS
Registered User
Medium format blows away the cron quality.
You're in a whole new snack bracket.
You're in a whole new snack bracket.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Not for me after I took my first portrait with the Cron.
MF gives you more in tonal range and nothing else.
FrankS
Registered User
Finer grain, better rendering of fine detail
You're near Toronto. Just for fun, we should get together and take identical shots: you with 35mm and Summicron, me with MF.
You're near Toronto. Just for fun, we should get together and take identical shots: you with 35mm and Summicron, me with MF.
goamules
Well-known
Actually, MF and especially LF give you a lot you cannot get with 35mm. Better tonal range to start. Higher resolution in larger prints. When you try to enlarge a postage stamp sized negative to 8x10, and compare it to my 8x10 negative, contact printed, it WILL blow you away! Shorter depth of field for portraits, perspective, and classic lens affects are also much better. But the biggest difference in LF is movements. You can get things in focus (or out) that you never can with a fixed plane 35mm. Basically, all you get with 35mm is portability. That's IT. All you get with digital is ease of use/viewing.
To the OP, try LF sometime.
To the OP, try LF sometime.
FrankS
Registered User
I find MF a good compromise between image quality and portability.
goamules
Well-known
I bet you're right. I still haven't gone MF, just another thing to do....and film getting so scarce. I mostly shoot 5x7 and wholeplate, some 8x10, and a little 11x14. Film and wetplate.
farlymac
PF McFarland
I for one am very happy that harpo now has one of the most iconic MF cameras ever made (that should start a new line of arguments). No one else thought of making a rapid winding rack like that. No hiding when you got ready to take the next shot, ratchet thunking your way through the roll. Interchangeable lenses, interchangeable backs, a very unique flash holder, and that big handle to hold it all. You could get a good workout using the Rapid all day long. I miss mine a lot. Gonna try and talk the friend I sold it to out of it one of these days.
Medium Format Forever!
PF
Medium Format Forever!
PF
harpofreely
Well-known
I'm in the same place as FrankS: having shot everything from 1/2 frame to 4x5 over the last 4 years, MF is my personal best balance between IQ and portability/practicality considerations. And by IQ, in addition to "image quality" in the grain/resolution/gradation etc. sense, I mean "the qualities I want to see in an image" - the DOF and highlight rendering of MF just work for my "vision," such as it is. MF gives more more of what I still like about shooting film, and less of what I don't, while still offering fast-enough lenses and freedom from the tripod.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Thank you, Frank. I'll be happy to see you where I'm. I'm in Toronto only few times per year just because of work.
The resolution and huge printing size is not the argument for me. 5x7, 8x10 is all I do.
Cron (Summitar, Summarit) gives me the rendering and character, which most portable MF can't give.
I have Rolleicord because it has something special in portraits. Classic Hassie has it as well, but I'm not SLR person at all.
goamules
Well-known
I have looked at Kodak Medalists a few times. But have so many formats, just didn't want to start another.
FrankS
Registered User
Ko.fe. You have a rollicord so you should see the MF difference, even at 8x10.
Taken with MF. Probably can't tell on computer screen, but there is so much tonality and ifne detail in this 11x14 print, that you can get lost in it.
Taken with MF. Probably can't tell on computer screen, but there is so much tonality and ifne detail in this 11x14 print, that you can get lost in it.
oftheherd
Veteran
How dare you imply the Koni Omega Rapid is better and less iconic than the Mamiya Super Press 23? The 35mm-like wind lever on the roll film backs beats the pull-push-thunk of the Koni. And there was also a handle with a shutter release and the roll film holder gave a good hand hold on the other side. The Mamiya was lighter, had better lenses, and if you got tired of its weight, it could take the photos for you.
Well farlymac, will that get us off on another track?
Actually harpofreely, I am happy for you. I do have a Super Press 23 I like very much. But the Konis were known to be fine photo taking instruments as well. And you will really love the negatives you get. I lusted for a Koni before I got my Super Press 23. I went for a long time with only the 100mm lens, and still loved mine for the big negatives. A 6x7 or 6x9 negative will blow away a 6x6. Good luck with it. I hope you will show us some of your photos with it. MF is a good compromise between 35mm and LF, and just good on its own.harpofreely
Well-known
So far, I've just got a few scans from a quick test-roll done to make sure the thing was actually working (some slightly over-cooked FP4+): https://www.flickr.com/photos/46459541@N02/sets/72157655838662255.
More to come!
JChrome
Street Worker
Glad you've caught the bug!
I don't always get amazing shots with my 6x9 cameras.. and when I do, I know that I could've gotten the same thing with my 35mm cameras. But when it all comes together and I've got the composition, lighting and everything right, MF adds those wonderful subtle differences that can make photos sing even more.
presspass
filmshooter
Used the Koni-Omega for several years in the early 70s at a small weekly newspaper. Loved it and the results. Bought another one two years ago, but it doesn't seem to have the same magic. Maybe it's just not in good shape. I do know one of the magazines overlaps shots. All in all, a nice camera and I should use it more, but I seem stuck on 35. Enjoy.
