Thinking Medium Format.. TLR or Hassy or RB67?

TLR: One lens only, but an excellent one, plus robust and not too heavy cameras. Except when you go w the mamiya tlr, where you have interchangeable lenses but heavy stuff. Price should be lower than RB or Hassy. You can buy an excellent performing tlr for 2-300 $ already.

6x6 SLR: Hassy is just ONE choice, the expensive one; you have rollei, bronica, you have kowa, especially the kowa is a good quality for the price they go for.

6x7 slr: RB and such are considerably bigger than 6x6 slr or tlr ones. Here at least, in the Netherlands, they are not cheaper than tlr's - far from it.

Finally you also have rangefinder 6x6's and 6x7's, with famously good lenses (fujis, mamiyas). These might be the fastest to work with, and certainly the most lightweight (if there's soimething like that in medium format).

Any of these will give you much much better results [technically] than your Seagull.
 
I have a Rolleicord V and with the excellent Rolleinar adaptors, you can do super close work and head and shoulders shots. They are a bit of a pain in the ass as you have to put one lens on the looking lens and one on the taking lens but they are of excellent quality and the super narrow depth of field can be very fun to play with. It doesn't have the sharpest lens but it has a nice footprint and stopped down for landscape work, it is plenty sharp.

I really like it and it's very light and portable. I bought and sold a Mamiya 6 which was also a great camera but ultimately since I do mostly street work, I dumped the Mamiya 6 in favor of a Leica and kept the Rolleicord for anytime I get the medium format urge. Rollei's have the really nice mechanical feel of a Leica. The Mamiya although small and light for a medium format camera was just a bit big and bulky for street work for me.
 
The trouble with mf is that all of the various systems have their various compromises in ways that 35mm SLR systems do not. MF RF's are great but won't focus close enough for a classic headshot -MF SLR's will although you may need a small extension tube. Non leaf shutter systems have cheaper and faster lenses but limited flash sync speed (my pentax 67 only has 1/30th). Also the variations in camera design and operation are far greater. The best thing to do is to make a list of what you need the camera to do and then make a short list of cameras, then, if you can, hire each camera for a weekend to try it, a MF camera is still a considerable investment and not a decision to be rushed.
 
Some thoughts on above comments:

You won't notice a difference between 645 and 6x7 until 11x14. Scaling that down, why leave 35mm? Not sure I agree with it anyway. There are a lot of factors such as how close do you view your 11x14's? How easy is it for any particular individual to hold the particular camera being used?

Hassy glass isn't better than other. Well I don't know either, and it has already been commented on.

SLRs are best for close up/macro. Well, certainly for some that is true. But that is normally a slowed down process. So using a ground glass back on my Super Press 23, or measuring from the marked film plane to the subject isn't that much more added to the mix imho. If you prefer TLRs why not stick with Mamiya 220 330 with a paramender? Except ...

Why 6x6 rather than 6x7. Maybe it is just me. I loved my first 6x6, a Yashica 124 MAT G. I still have 6x6, but other than in a folder, tend not to carry or use them. My experience is that with 6x6 you end up with 645 usable area, and I don't think 645 is that much better than 35mm. Well, that is just imho. I guess my preference for 6x7 shows.

4x5 is worth considering, especially in the Graphic series. Not really all that much heavier, lenses are usually not very heavy either. Closeups are easy if you aren't afraid of ground glass. Even 4x5 field/monorail are worth considering if you don't have to carry them too far. Granted that takes many backpackers out ot that mix. But I used to sometimes correspone with a you fella who backpacked day trips with 8x10 and loved it. Not sure I would want to do that with even a magnesium Calumet 8x10.

I sure was happy with 35mm and the results I got for a long time. Granted, I am not giving up my Super Press 23, but I still use 35mm. I have 4x5 and just haven't pushed myself to use it yet. I really want to, but know how good 35mm and 6x7 do for me. That is also why my 8x10 hasn't been used yet. (Darn GAS and ebay!!!!) I just haven't been able to push myself into it. I think I may try the 4x5 with a MF holder I have for it.

Anyway, sorry for the winded post. Just one last thing: Look into a Mamiya Universal or Super Press 23. System cameras that I don't think are any heavier than some 6x6.

Cheers.
 
Toby said:
- MF RF's are great but won't focus close enough for a classic headshot -.
Click to expand...

An Agfa Super Isolette is a 6x6 medium format RF folder with a leaf-shutter and unit focusing that focuses as close as 1 meter. That is pretty close.

In so far as limitations, the 4 element, 3 group Tessar formula lenses only opens up to f/3.5 and you only have the DOF of 75mm lens, not a 90 or 135.

TLR's are quirky, but yield excellent large prints. That's a territory where 35mm is weak.

For the money spent , a $50 Minolta Autocord LMX that I picked up a couple of years back is by far the best bang for the buck in my medium format line-up.

The problem is I like to carry more than one camera. So, I prefer using my medium format folders, as they are much more convenient to carry and shooting is more like using a large 35mm RF.
 
If TLR's are of interest be sure to investigate the Mamiya 330f or 330S with their associated paramenders so parallax ceases to be a problem. They are built like tanks, and unfortunately are heavy, but have excellent lenses. These cameras were Wedding Photography staples for years, and are still used by some. I have a Mamiya 6 as well, but agree with Toby that close-ups and portraiture are a problem with the 6 and 7 systems.
 
I own and regularly use two rolleiflexes and a Hassy, all are great, great performers. I probably use my Rolleiflex 2.8 E more often than the Hassy, it's easier to hold, has fewer lens choices, but mostly is just cool as hell :).

If you get a TLR you limit your GAS issues...after you buy all the Rolleinars, and filters, and hoods, and pano-adapters, and tripod adapters...... :D

check out my photoblog (link below), lots of rolleiflex images on there

Todd
 
Yep, as soon as I'd got my Rolleicord it was GAS GAS GAS!

straight onto eBay, got a bunch of filters, a rolleinar. and unfortunately the *wrong* rolleikin which didnt fit my 'cord! (OT - and as such I have a Rolleikin going cheap to anyone who wants it!).

Damn you all! Now I'm looking at Isolette's on eBay!!
 
I wasn't sure how much the original poser of the question needed closeup stuff, but rather was more interested in portraits. In that case, I think a TLR is a good choice -- Rolleicord, older Rolleiflex (early '50s vintage with Tessar lens), Autocord are all excellent choices, as is a Yashicamat or Yashica D (with Yashinon lens) and a Ricoh Diacord, which is a sleeper. I'm a big fan of the rather hard to come by Kalloflex as well.

No one has mentioned the Mamiya 645 -- not the later Super but the original M645, 645J (somewhat fewer features) or 645 1000s. These, and the lenses and finders for them, are very inexpensive now, and are quite well made. No interchangeable backs, but if you're shooting 15 on a roll with 120 film, I don't know how crucial that is.

Others have mentioned Kowa. The Super 66 does have interchangeable backs, and the Kowa lenses, as said by others, really are excellent.

Nor has anyone mentioned the Koni-Omega-Rapid series. These are plentiful and cheap, and the Rapid M and Rapid 200 have interchangeable backs. Rangefinder cameras, 6x7 format, and the lenses are as good as anything out there.
 
A (controversial?) vote from me for the Pentacon Six. There are certainly all the well known reliability issues surrounding them but buy one cheaply and get the full service/upgrade from Pentacon themselves (around £180 including shipping to the UK) and it's a very economical route into medium format. The factory upgrade involves a proper sorting out of the film advance and the fitting of a bright, gridded focussing screen and mirror lock-up.
The CJZ lenses are seemingly excellent (especially the 50 mm / f4) and the camera is relatively light, handling like a large 35 mm SLR. As with all of the 35mm CZJ lenses, they all seem to focus very close and with an adapter, they'll also work on a Mamiya 645. The Russian lenses for them can be good too and they're often very cheap - again, it's worth factoring a service into the cost of buying one.
 
shutterflower said:
I SAID that i never used the Hassy.
Click to expand...

Ooops. Sorry, George. I read through your post and jumped too quickly.

To all - please note that I did not say that Hassy glass is better than everyone else. But I would say that you can get as sharp a result from Hassy lenses as with any others. They're still overpriced, though.

allan
 
Here are some more thoughts, though they are likely repeats from others in bits and pieces.

If I were to go TLR, I'd start with the Mamiya C330, etc system. Bellows focusing, so relatively close-focusing, and interchangeable lenses. I think I priced out a system on ebay and I think you could get 1 body and a wide, standard, and tele lens for about...$450? Something like that.

A Bronica SQ-A (not Ai) system with WLF, wide, standard and tele with a single back comes in at about $700-800.

I personally like 6x6. I would prefer to go straight to that or bigger. I personally feel 645 is a bit too close to 35mm, even though it's actually quite a bit larger. Then again, I've taken to 6x6 composition pretty quickly, whereas not everyone does. I got the 6x7 as a gift, believe it or not (I know, lucky me). Bigger negative and slightly rectangular, so perhaps best of both worlds. However, I don't know if it's that huge of a benefit. Certainly not a deal-breaker if I had only 6x6.

Beyond that...other than going to something more special like 6x12 or 6x17 panoramic, I would go to large format. You do work a LOT slower so it's NOT for everyone. But that's what I would do, personally.

allan
 
I just wanted to pipe in with a the vote for Bronica systems. I am shooting a project right now with a SQ-am with a 80mm and a S2 with 75mm nikkor and 150mm. I love this system. The SQ-am has a great hand winder and is a leaf shutter system. The S2 great system were you can take advantage of great glass made both by Nikon and Bronica. The only down fall with this one is the the loudest shutter in the world, sound like a shotgun going off. Not for street shooting.

Now I have a special place in heart for Yashicamats. WLF, great glass and build to last! I like using it for street shooting as people don't stop and put a smile on or become JC Penny models. Plus you can use Rollei bay 1 filters and attachments for your Yashicamat.
 
Brian:

You are absolutely right, sort of. The Kowa 6 does not have interchangeable backs. But I believe the Kowa 66 does.

Ted
 
You can't beat a TLR when just starting out in medium format: quiet, easily portable, versatile, and reasonably priced. I also like my Pentax 645 quite a bit.
 
See avatar. Graphlex is a "street" camera. Not particulary inobtrusive I'll admit... and it can draw the attention of some strange people.
Not all that bulky when you fold it up (not counting the film holders...)
4x5 will scan beautifly with a flatbed, and you can make useful, jewel-like contact prints with the bathroom light switch if you get the urge to wet print.

Was a while ago, but I have taken a TLR back backing. No more bulky than a 35mm. That "cubic" shape was actualy easier to fit in a pack (when it rains for instance, or when you want your hands free and nothing around your neck to hang yourself with) Only hassle, as I remember was the short rolls of film that had to be changed in akward places.

Portrait shots? In a thread (rant?) about "normal" lenses some one said "...thats why God gave you feet."
 
Last edited:
I use a Koni Omega M. Cheap, 6x7, interchangeable backs, amazing lenses... and it is a rangefinder!
I really enjoy mine and would enjoy it even more if I had time to take pictures...grrrr...
 
Thanks for all of the great input everyone!

To answer some questions, I'm looking for a system that isn't just a replacement for my Leica, but something that offers capabilities that don't easily exist with the Leica. For example, close focus/macro shots. I've also been bitten a few times by Parallax error. That led me to look at some of the MF SLR style cameras (ie Hassy). I really like 6x6. It gets me looking at the world differently.

I really like the TLR for the same reason that I love my Leica; it's oldschool. It is just one cool looking camera with a great lense. And with Rollei's atleast, the lense doesn't come off, so I don't have to worry about dropping more $$ on different lenses. I didn't realize that it is possible to do close focus/macro with a Rollei with the additional accessories. That opens up the world of head/shoulder portraits.

Large Format being slow? Doesn't really bother me. Part of my willingness to get into LF is because it will slow me down. It is the opposite of the Leica and there is some appeal to that. I think it would make me respect each camera all the much more.

Too many decisions. I also worry that this leap to MF/LF is going to kick off another round of GAS.

-Paul
 
Toby said:
The trouble with mf is that all of the various systems have their various compromises in ways that 35mm SLR systems do not. MF RF's are great but won't focus close enough for a classic headshot -MF SLR's will although you may need a small extension tube. Non leaf shutter systems have cheaper and faster lenses but limited flash sync speed (my pentax 67 only has 1/30th). Also the variations in camera design and operation are far greater. The best thing to do is to make a list of what you need the camera to do and then make a short list of cameras, then, if you can, hire each camera for a weekend to try it, a MF camera is still a considerable investment and not a decision to be rushed.
Click to expand...

The big compromise with 35mm is the negative size (pluses are small size and fast lenses). It's fine for 8x10 enlargements with slow film (I know, leicaphiles claim that they can match MF prints, but that's just not true. Real estate matters.).

You won't find any single system that meets all needs. That's why I own both a MF rangefinder (Bronica RF645) and a MF SLR (Mamiya 645). And I don't know how anyone can say that 645 is too close to 35mm to bother with - it's got 2.7X the area and enlarges much better than 35mm.

Anyway, don't expect that your next purchase will be your last!
 
RObert Budding said:
The big compromise with 35mm is the negative size (pluses are small size and fast lenses). It's fine for 8x10 enlargements with slow film (I know, leicaphiles claim that they can match MF prints, but that's just not true. Real estate matters.).

You won't find any single system that meets all needs. That's why I own both a MF rangefinder (Bronica RF645) and a MF SLR (Mamiya 645). And I don't know how anyone can say that 645 is too close to 35mm to bother with - it's got 2.7X the area and enlarges much better than 35mm.

Anyway, don't expect that your next purchase will be your last!
Click to expand...

Well, 35mm will give you better than 8x10 prints with care. Slow film, tripods, good glass. MF and LF will often require the same.

As to 645 not being that much better than 35mm, well I don't mean it isn't better. And I guess my thinking it isn't worth it rather than something bigger is from my perspective of having 6x7. 645 doesn't seem so big then, just as 6x7 doesn't seem so big compared to 4x5. Still, don't mean to cut down anything that others enjoy and that works for them.

We all have our preferences or there wouldn't be such wonderful variety, and so much GAS. :D :bang:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom