WLF or Prism with Medium Format SLR?

WLF or Prism with Medium Format SLR?

  • Waist level finder

    Votes: 41 44.1%

  • Prism finder

    Votes: 22 23.7%

  • I use both fairly evenly

    Votes: 30 32.3%
  • Total voters
    93
jim_jm said:
I use the 45-degree prism finder on my Bronica SQ-A most often. ......
Click to expand...

I shot a SQ-A for many years. I had the WLF, the 90 degree prism, and the 45 degree prism. (the WLF being the most expensive) I used the 45 degree prism about 98% of the time. But I almost always shot hand held. I do believe it is directly related to your style.
 
It's about point of view. Lower POV with the WLF, eye-level with the straight prism, the 45 degree prism is in between.

I liked the 45 prism when I was shooting MF SLR.

Now, with digital, the flip-out LCD brings back that different POV of the WLF.
 
A waist-level finder is much easier to hold for a TLR and for modular cameras (e.g. Hassy, RB67, Mamiya 645). While the prisms make viewing and focusing a lot easier, they add significantly to the weight of the camera, and it's a chore to hold those up to your eye. But cameras like the Kiev 60 and Pentax 67 are very comfortable to hold using the finder.
 
I really like the waist level finder on my 6x6 Bronica. The WLF allows shooting from much lower than eye level; thus avoiding all pictures having that 'looking down' signature. There's the flip-up magnifier that makes critical focusing possible. Another plus is the size/weight/compactness advantage over a prism; on 6x6 these are big. The left-right reversed image has it ups/downs; on the one hand, seeing the world reversed can help judge composition better, but on the other, it makes for a weird experience getting your prints back.. they really look different from what you saw in the finder.

Obviously, on a 6x6 you don't need to tilt the camera sideways for portrait/landscape orientation, so a WLF is no hindrance in that respect. For a 6x9 I'd probably regard it in a much different light.
 
I have the WLF and the 45 degree prism. I find it uncomfortable to hold the camera up to eye level with the prism, and the 45 degree angle feel funny to me, so I seldom use it. I used to have the chimney finder, and I think I want to return to that, as the WLF at times lets sunlight shine on the screen, whereas the chimney blocks extraneous light.
 
I have an autocord so WLF only, prior to that had a C330 with the WLF and Prism finder, always felt that the prism finder was more of a pain then a help. For me personally, big camera = WLF.
 
Yes! Chimney finder should be another option to vote for. For me (on the Hasselblad) WLF is most used, then chimney, and rarely the 45deg prism.
 
Prisms on "giant 35" (Pentax, Pentacon 6) and 645; WL on square format brick-shape or rotating back such as Hasselblad, Kowa, RB67...

Cheers,

R.
 
One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the weight savings of the WLF over the prism.

Not sure which MF SLR you're using but with the Pentax 67, the WLF is maybe a pound lighter. That pound makes a big* difference when hauling that system around. Traveling was much easier. Since then I switched to traveling with the fuji GW series and haven't regretted it.
 
Zeiss ikonta 531 :confused: :p

Otherwise both WLF and prism
WLF
Yashica MAT 124 G and Mamiya RZ67PROII
prism
Mamiya 645 PRO and Pentax 67
Both prism and WLF
Nikon F3
 
JChrome said:
One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the weight savings of the WLF over the prism.

Not sure which MF SLR you're using but with the Pentax 67, the WLF is maybe a pound lighter. That pound makes a big* difference when hauling that system around. Traveling was much easier. Since then I switched to traveling with the fuji GW series and haven't regretted it.
Click to expand...
I would say the Pentax 67 is wery anoying to use without the prism which is not that much more weight(if any at all) if it's the plain meterless one.
 
I use the Mam 645 pro TL with both. WLF on tripod in the studio, the prism outdoors as it has the built in meter with spot metering and avg metering plus manual, and is much easier to focus quickly and accurately than the WLF.

If I want to use a WLF outdoors, I pack a Rollieflex.
 
I use a mix of both on my RB and c33 depending on the scenario, for example the prism when I need a head shot at normal height and the WLF when im going for more low angle portraits or landscapes.
 
I use both but prefer the prism on my Rollie and my C220. I have a hard time keeping the image level when using the WLF and so use them mostly for posed shots. I hate the extra weight of the prisms but what can you do.
 
I just bought a nice RB67 prism in Japan and intend to attach it to my Plaubel Makiflexes. As I have stated before, I prefer the "Stovepipe" viewfinders over all. Plaubel made one, but I never have seen one for sale in 30+ years of looking -hard- for this stuff. So I made my own from an RB67 Stovepipe. Not hard to do.

DSC05602 by Nokton48, on Flickr

^^^ Also shown is a Fuji GX680 250mm f5.6 lens that I have hacked to the Makiflexes. Just arrived from Japan.
 
I strongly prefer a WLF, but with the medical problems in my neck, I'm pretty much forced to a prism. It's an unpleasant learning experience.
 
it depends on the camera!

the non-square formats (except revolving back models) pretty much require a prism to be usable.

My MF SLR is square format. I've got a 45 degree prism, but use the WLF for about 95% of photos. I have a prism for my Mamiya TLR system also. Almost never use it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom