Buying a medium format camera

Well I shot another couple of rolls of OOD film today, one was a Jessops ISO 100 dated best before 01/2000 and the other an FP4+ dated best before 06/2002.

I wanted to do it today as I have got to decide this evening if I am going to purchase the outfit or not. Funny thing is earlier this afternoon I happened to say to the chap that I am buying the outfit from that I would ideally like to get a Jobo CPE2 processor as I would like to process my own E6 and C41 120 films as well, he said he had a nearly new CPE2 that he had hardly used and he will dig it out and I can have it included in the deal along with any other darkroom kit that he comes across.

Massive result!


I have processed the two films (together in the same tank) for 25 minutes (5 minutes extra) in ID11 1+3 as it was a dull overcast day and I wanted to boost the contrast a bit. Well, they look to have come out beautifully, I cannot wait to actually try it with some fresh film.

Here are 3 images from todays 20 minute photo session at Saltash Passage about 10 minutes walk from my house (20 minutes back, it's all uphill), although it took less than 3 to get there because I drove. First piccy had the edges trimmed of as it was not completely straight in the holder, the other 2 are complete with frame edges, so no cropping at all.

180mm on 9 year OOD jessops ISO 100

Boats.jpg


50mm on 9 year OOD jessops ISO 100

Bridge.jpg


180mm on 7 year OOD FP4+

swans.jpg
 
EdBray said:
Well I shot another couple of rolls of OOD film today, one was a Jessops ISO 100 dated best before 01/2000 and the other an FP4+ dated best before 06/2002.


180mm on 9 year OOD jessops ISO 100

50mm on 9 year OOD jessops ISO 100

180mm on 7 year OOD FP4+
Click to expand...

I know, its ridiculous what manufacturers rate their b/w at.
I suppose they just can't guarantee it to be absolutely perfect after the use by date.
B/W has such great latitude, its got to have green fur on it before its useless.
 
Interesting subject matter! good to see that im not alone in being a weirdo liking these prints! :LOL:
 
Uneducated_Rick said:
Youth of today :bang:

Your horizon isn't level for the football pitch - time to get things right first, then shoot later ;)




What did you say?!?

What chemicals do you sniff at work?


Both of these are coming back a lot more :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

Uh, yes, wonky horizon, deliberate.. connotes... unease..

:thinking:

:bonk:

Lost rules :)
Lost, desperate housewives, shameless and heroes - 4 best shows on TV :)

Ed those are some mighty fine results!

I haven't had the time in the past few days to get out with the 645. I think it's lusting for it to be used and abused!
 
Thought I'd just keep it in here.

I think I'm processing and printing wrong.

I am never happy with my prints that are done in the darkroom.
They are always lacking contrast (irrelevant that I consistently use a grade 4 filter) and they're just so tonally flat.
Plus, in the midtones there is this, what can only be described as 'wishy washy' effect on the print.

Is this a product of under developing the print?

I think I'm doing the film processing okay, since as you can see the negs came out pretty fandabbydozey, but perhaps it IS an issue with the film?
 
Frustration to the maximum!

Wandering in the woods for bits and bobs to shoot (there was a broken fence, a signpost covered in mud, a pair of boxers, a tyre and a wooden post in a pond) and I found this abandoned service station thing. Walked in, it was pitch black and I was scared, plus I was with a girl who wasn't much help, and wouldn't be much help should it be a drug *** or something :p, so I grabbed the flash gun, fired a few shots to make sure it was empty, and went in. It was awesome (albeit quite small - just a room), but way too dark and since I didn't have a remote release there was no way I could do a bulb exposure. So I went outside, framed it perfectly against the woodland, checked the exposure and focusing twice, and then once more, wound the film on to find I'd bloody finished the roll!

Left the other roll in the car! damn it!
 
I've got a roll of tri-x to use, its dated 01/2001 but I'll give it a go. I'll take some portraits on it too and we can see how they come out. I only get 10 shots to your 15 though!
 
foodpoison said:
We, the talkphotography team, should create a camera that only produces 1 image on a roll of 120 film - one huge panorama!
Click to expand...

It's been done with a rotary camera. In fact, I've seen one which can put a single image on a roll of 35mm film. The same 360 degree view repeated a few times.

You have to walk around with the camera unless you want to appear in the image.


Steve.
 
Thought all you guys who have had a helping hand in this thread would like to see the result :)

Some contact sheets printed at college. Pretty naff, since we don't have a 120 neg contact sheet thingy, so the negs were placed straight onto the paper (in the dark, so who knew which way was up :p)

Click for the larger sizes :)





 
Well I've just spend another £210 on my Mamiya RB67 Pro S outfit as I have just bought two more RB67 Pro SD backs. One was a nr mint boxed version @ £80 and the other could well have been the last NEW RB67 Pro SD Back in the country although it did cost me £130.

So I have now got a Mamiya RB67 Pro S with 3 backs, 3 lenses (50, 90, 180) WLF and a couple of Mamiya hoods. Also got a CPE2+ thrown in. Totla spend for all was £530. I got the Camera, 3 Lenses, WLF, 120 back and CPE2+ for £320 in the end. The Bronica SQA for sale thread on here helped with that (y)

My wife isn't too chuffed with the New Kitchen decoration though, although it is considerably smaller than my CPP2 was.
 
EdBray said:
Well I've just spend another £210 on my Mamiya RB67 Pro S outfit as I have just bought two more RB67 Pro SD backs. One was a nr mint boxed version @ £80 and the other could well have been the last NEW RB67 Pro SD Back in the country although it did cost me £130.

So I have now got a Mamiya RB67 Pro S with 3 backs, 3 lenses (50, 90, 180) WLF and a couple of Mamiya hoods. Also got a CPE2+ thrown in. Totla spend for all was £530. I got the Camera, 3 Lenses, WLF, 120 back and CPE2+ for £320 in the end. The Bronica SQA for sale thread on here helped with that (y)

My wife isn't too chuffed with the New Kitchen decoration though, although it is considerably smaller than my CPP2 was.
Click to expand...

Well done Ed! I'm trying to source a spare A12 back for the blad, but prices of even half nice ones are pretty horrendous. :puke:
 
wow this is some thread!

now im starting to wonder if rather than a 35mm job i should have a look for a bronica....
 
imo, no. 35mm film bodies can be had for pennies, but 35mm is FAR less daunting than medium format, simply for the fact that it is handled easier.

and any of you film buffs out there, this is coming from a relative film beginner so don't be coming along and saying MF is easier, because it's not :p
 
the ease is less of a concern than the cost and useability*

with either system i would look to home develop by the end of the summer (not feasible where we live now) but lifespan and potential repairs is a concern. Scanners is another costly issue as Foodpoison raised and then the cost and availability of film itself.

I originally stated i wanted a film camera for nice portrait work but as far as i can make out a 35mm setup lends itself to more applications being more portable? Also with the 35mm i can interchange lenses with my digi SLR, another bonus. BUT if i were to use a film camera predominantly for portraits then medium format seems to stomp all over 35mm?


*invented word
 
fontmoss a thought on developing at the uni your going to med school in (sorry i forgot which) they may have a photo club/society that has a darkroom and people that know how to use it, not much help with deciding between formats but might make home developing easier
 
yeah im hoping so, also that i can get stuff printed etc as well

good call though
 
fontmoss said:
the ease is less of a concern than the cost and useability*

with either system i would look to home develop by the end of the summer (not feasible where we live now) but lifespan and potential repairs is a concern. Scanners is another costly issue as Foodpoison raised and then the cost and availability of film itself.

I originally stated i wanted a film camera for nice portrait work but as far as i can make out a 35mm setup lends itself to more applications being more portable? Also with the 35mm i can interchange lenses with my digi SLR, another bonus. BUT if i were to use a film camera predominantly for portraits then medium format seems to stomp all over 35mm?


*invented word
Click to expand...

There's no arguing the benefit of the larger negative with MF, but having said that 35mm film has come a long way, and choosing the right film for the job can get some stunning results.

Without spending a huge wedge of dough you should be able to pick up a nice 35mm body with all the convenience you're used to in your DSLR - autofocus, TTL metering, TTL flash etc, and compatibility with your existing lenses which is a powerful argument in favour of 35mm.

Getting into medium format on too tight a budget could be a recipe for trouble.
 
Getting into medium format on too tight a budget could be a recipe for trouble.
Click to expand...

this is what im worried about. i think id go manual (but with metering) if went 35mm route just because i quite enjoy manual focus

EDIT: id be looking to use ilford hp5 black and white film with the 35mm
 
fontmoss said:
this is what im worried about. i think id go manual (but with metering) if went 35mm route just because i quite enjoy manual focus

EDIT: id be looking to use ilford hp5 black and white film with the 35mm
Click to expand...

CLICKY

;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top