the complication of MF

As most know, I have the Mamiya Super Press 23. So when it is MF time, I can take it, the 150mm, 100mm, 65mm, and 50mm along with 3 or 4 backs so I can change film type. Sure it's bigger, but that is mitigated because I can carry backs in place of more cameras.

Frankly, 2 or 3 years ago, I made a specific effort to acquire a small bag, a Yashica FX 103, and 3 zooms from 18mm to 150mm. I have a 2x extender, and a Contax 50mm f/1.4, a dedicated Yashica flash, and a Yashica FX3 all manual camera as backup and extra body. A surprisingly small bag has room for film, a few filters, and a backup Welta 6x6/645 MF folder. What else is needed?

Often now, I only venture out with a Sony digital my daughters bought me. For more serious stuff, the above kit, or my Fujica ST 901 kit if I really want to stay 35 and have better lenses, and the Super Press 23 is always there if I want those gorgeous 6x7 negatives.

But that's me. Looks like you are on track for what pleases you Frank, and that is really all that counts. Happy shooting.
 
I've now decided to only ever take one camera setup plus lenses with me plus my minilux, makes things a whole lot easier on the head. At the weekend I put the bronny (etrsi) with a 50, 75, 150 and a spare back in the old billingham, it was great, the only bummer is having to change the film more frequently (one back 50 velvia, the other 100 acros). It's funny though I was watching Lost in Translation (again) the other night and Giovanni Ribisi' character has 3 or 4 RF645's in a peli case.
 
Keith said:
Strange to read about the Iskra ... I am currently contemplating one of those at the moment for my trips into the local rainforest where I will need to carry a small light tripod as well. The 6x6 will suit this environment I hope! I wouldn't fancy carrying two Bronicas. 😱
Click to expand...

Hi Keith, don't know about using my Iskra's in the hot and damp. Since electronics are not involved they should be ok. They love cold damp weather. I'd still take the Colonel's Zorki 4/Jupiter 8 loaded with Kodachrome, if there was enough light. 🙂

For the most SF severe environmental reliability I'd use my Canon Ftb's.

Regards.
 
memphis said:
This is Frank in 6 months after having a complete breakdown from not being done...
Click to expand...

That would be quite a radical shift for me!

The second BRF645 is soon to be in the mail to me as a result of a trade for some redundant 35mm gear.

I'm considering this outfit for "serious photography" sortees. A 35mm RF will still be with me day in and day out whenever photography is not the primary objective and I want/need to travel light. I still print B+W the traditional dark and wet way, otherwise colour neg film and digital converting would be more efficient camera body-wise.
 
Seems to me that the companion camera to the Bronica RFs is a point and shoot like the Hexar. Since the Bronica handles as easily as the Leica, there's no point in bringing a leica which would cover the same equivalent focal lengths as the Bronica except in a smaller film size. You can use the Hexar in low light or when you don't want to manual focus. When I use to carry my Bronica and my Leica, I'd wind up not using one at all.
 
Hi Nick, I only have the 65mmf4 normal lens for both BRF's so I was thinking that the 35mm body would be for longer (90) and shorter (25, 35) focal lengths and better low light capability. (2 stops with a 50 f2 lens)

I'll obviously see how it plays out once I've got the kit together, I'm just thinking out loud in anticipation.
 
Any discussion on this question is going to be subjective. One man's salt is another's poison. (No reference to the recent problem with pet food.)

The only MF camera I own is a Yashicamat 124, which I bought brand-spanking new in 1970. It takes great pictures, but it's probably considered a little out-of-date. And since I'm nearing 70, I don't need to saddle myself with too much weight.
 
"Any discussion on this question is going to be subjective."

I totally agree. Any discussion on any question of opinion is going to be, unless it is a statement of facts, which are themselves sometimes disputable.
 
Why are MF lenses slow? Is it prohibitively expensive for an F2 65mm?
 
Yes, faster MF lenses are more expensive to make because of the larger image circle they need to project onto the larger negative at decent lpmm performance out to the edges.
 
Simplicity ....


is the word here ....


The photographer can meke the standard lens look like a wide angle shot or a tele shot, all depends on the "capture" and framing of the image ....

make it simple, get a Rolleiflex .....
 
While I sometimes wish my RF645's 65mm were an f/2 or at least f/2.8, I also think the f/4 max aperture has helped avoid focusing errors from narrow DoF. I use f/4 a lot, as in typical office interiors with EI 500 (Fuji NPZ800) my shutter speed will be around 1/30 to 1/60 sec, and this is quite acceptable.

By way of some compensation you can "get away" with using faster film in 645 than in 35 without getting a grainy look. With DoF and grain trading off against faster lenses in 135 format, there's a balance of benefits to consider. Of course "learning to love the grain" hands the job to 35. 😀

Will you be shopping for a 45mm f/4 for the RF645, Frank?
 
"Will you be shopping for a 45mm f/4 for the RF645, Frank?"

Hi Doug. No, I've got a Fujica GS645W for that. Wouldn't mind a 100mm lens though. Someone just got one for $450 I read recently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom