Medium Format Camera

PeterA

PeterA

Messages
205
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi All,

I am interested in buying a medium format camera for landscape photography. I already own the Olympus OM 35mm SLR, and use either the 24mm or 35-80mm lenses for this type of photography. I was thinking of 120 roll slide film use as well (Velvia).

Would you be able to recommend a medium format camera with a suitable lens for this type of photography:

1) If I had loads of money to spend
2) a mid price range
3) a low budget

I suspect that the camera body is less important to that of the lens optics, but interested to know any major drawbacks with particular bodies that I may need to consider.

What type of lens would be best for this type of photography?

Many thanks in advance.

Pete
 
Unlike with digital, the camera body is the major decision as you are almost always tied into the manufacturers optics from then on.

What aspect ratio would you prefer? this is the first decision that then directs you towards the body.. 6x4.5, 6x6 ("square"), 6x7 ("ideal"), 6x8, 6x9, 6x12, 6x17.

The Medium Format Manual by Michael Freeman is available from £2-or-so secondhand on Amazon, it's a bit dated, doesn't cover every manufacturer, but it does cover most and I found it a very useful when considering my recent move to medium format.
 
PeterA said:
Hi All,

I am interested in buying a medium format camera for landscape photography. I already own the Olympus OM 35mm SLR, and use either the 24mm or 35-80mm lenses for this type of photography. I was thinking of 120 roll slide film use as well (Velvia).

Would you be able to recommend a medium format camera with a suitable lens for this type of photography:

1) If I had loads of money to spend
2) a mid price range
3) a low budget

I suspect that the camera body is less important to that of the lens optics, but interested to know any major drawbacks with particular bodies that I may need to consider.

What type of lens would be best for this type of photography?

Many thanks in advance.

Pete
Click to expand...

1) Hasselblad 503CW, CFE 4/40mm, CFi 3.5/60mm and CFE 2.8/80mm lenses
2) Bronica SQAi with ZenzanonPS 65mm F4
(^^^ I'm a sucker for square format on MF landscapes^^^)

3) A old folding camera - something old that'll shoot wide format shots on 120, perhaps like this. Gives you a chance to practice your sunny 16 rule and hyperfocal distance focusing.
 
The 'standard' focal length lens on a medium format camera is usually around 80 or 90mm. Sticking to bodies I know about, the Mamiya RB67 comes with a 90mm standard lens, but a 50mm lens will give you around 30mm (35mm equivalent) for wider landscape shots, while Hasselblads standard lens is 80mm and they have 50mm and 40mm wider lenses, the latter being equivalent to about 25mm in 35mm terms. If you want to go wider than that, and I think they do a 30mm - get your wallet out -you get the benefit of Zeiss optics with a blad, but at a price :eek:

As Alastair says, you need to decide on 6X6 or 6X7 initially.

The RB67 ((6X7) has a powerful argument in it's favour with the larger neg, and lenses for it are readily available second hand without costing the earth.

Hasselblad( 6X6) lenses on the other hand at the more sought after focal lengths particularly, (wide or tele) tend to be wallet busting prices.

Get a nice version of either of these cameras (avoid the cheap well - hammered rubbish) and you'll have a camera which will last you a lifetime.

They're not the only makes of course - just my personal preferences.
 
Alastair said:
Unlike with digital, the camera body is the major decision as you are almost always tied into the manufacturers optics from then on.

What aspect ratio would you prefer? this is the first decision that then directs you towards the body.. 6x4.5, 6x6 ("square"), 6x7 ("ideal"), 6x8, 6x9, 6x12, 6x17.

The Medium Format Manual by Michael Freeman is available from £2-or-so secondhand on Amazon, it's a bit dated, doesn't cover every manufacturer, but it does cover most and I found it a very useful when considering my recent move to medium format.
Click to expand...

Thanks Alastair. Whats the difference between square & ideal?

TheBigYin said:
1) Hasselblad 503CW, CFE 4/40mm, CFi 3.5/60mm and CFE 2.8/80mm lenses
2) Bronica SQAi with ZenzanonPS 65mm F4
(^^^ I'm a sucker for square format on MF landscapes^^^)

3) A old folding camera - something old that'll shoot wide format shots on 120, perhaps like this. Gives you a chance to practice your sunny 16 rule and hyperfocal distance focusing.
Click to expand...

Thanks Mark. Is it all manual exposure? If so I do have a hand held metre which would do the trick?

CT said:
The 'standard' focal length lens on a medium format camera is usually around 80 or 90mm. Sticking to bodies I know about, the Mamiya RB67 comes with a 90mm standard lens, but a 50mm lens will give you around 30mm (35mm equivalent) for wider landscape shots, while Hasselblads standard lens is 80mm and they have 50mm and 40mm wider lenses, the latter being equivalent to about 25mm in 35mm terms. If you want to go wider than that, and I think they do a 30mm - get your wallet out -you get the benefit of Zeiss optics with a blad, but at a price :eek:

As Alastair says, you need to decide on 6X6 or 6X7 initially.

The RB67 ((6X7) has a powerful argument in it's favour with the larger neg, and lenses for it are readily available second hand without costing the earth.

Hasselblad( 6X6) lenses on the other hand at the more sought after focal lengths particularly, (wide or tele) tend to be wallet busting prices.

Get a nice version of either of these cameras (avoid the cheap well - hammered rubbish) and you'll have a camera which will last you a lifetime.

They're not the only makes of course - just my personal preferences.
Click to expand...

Thanks CT. What is the recommended lens for landscape? Is it better to go with a 90 or something wider in this format?
 
A 90mm lens on a 6x7 is basically a standard lens, if your looking at wide angles then your looking at 65mm, 55mm which would be wide (roughly 35mm - 28mm in 35mm terms)
 
PeterA said:
Thanks Alastair. Whats the difference between square & ideal?



Thanks Mark. Is it all manual exposure? If so I do have a hand held metre which would do the trick?



Thanks CT. What is the recommended lens for landscape? Is it better to go with a 90 or something wider in this format?
Click to expand...

Well you can shoot landscape with any focal length if you carefully islolate your subject matter, but people usually tend to go for the wider view for landscape, so I'd think 40 or 50mm with medium format would be better. I think you'd find 80 or 90mm a bit restricting in the narrower field of view for those sweeping landscapes.
 
@ the OP, if you had money to burn, a Hassy SWC with a digi back to check focus and exposure etc before swapping out to a back containing velvia.

Do you have a spare £20k or so?
 
As a committed film user, I've gotta admire those stitched (pano) landscape shots with a digital camera :(
 
fixedimage said:
@ the OP, if you had money to burn, a Hassy SWC with a digi back to check focus and exposure etc before swapping out to a back containing velvia.
Click to expand...


:LOL:

I do that now only on a smaller scale.

saves wasting Polaroids.....



Umm...I dunno how I feel about that
 
PeterA said:
Thanks Alastair. Whats the difference between square & ideal?
Click to expand...

1cm, or 6cm^2.


Square format is a 6x6cm negative, ideal format is a 6x7cm (or 7x6cm) negative.

I'm a little indecisive. I shoot 6x9 on a 1940's vintage folding camera, 6x7 on a Mamiya RB67 Pro S, and at the weekend I picked up a Yashica D TLR to shoot 6x6 (I consider the Mamiya plus lenses a touch hefty for airline travel).

That probably reflects the budget points as well. You can get a functional 6x9 folder from £10, a square format TLR from £50 upwards, and something like the Mamiya starts at £300+ for a working body with back, lens and viewfinder.

I consider the RB67 my landscape MF camera, the 90mm is a very usable focal length and I've added a 180mm to allow me to better isolate parts of the landscape, which suits my style when shooting the 6x7 format.

What you get for going for the higher end MF cameras is essentially, in terms of increasing cost:
  • Interchangable lenses (not found on folders, or TLRs - except the C330)
  • Interchangable backs (not found on folders, or TLRs; on some bodies will allow a change of format from 6x7 to 6x4.5)
  • Larger format (moving from 6x4.5 to 6x6 or 6x7)
  • Rotatable back (not on all bodies, not relevant to square format but very convenient for 6x7)
  • Better build quality, better lens quality, wider ranges of available lenses
To me the cost/benefit/complexity pay-off peaks with the RB67 Pro S, but YMMV.
 
joxby said:
:LOL:

I do that now only on a smaller scale.

saves wasting Polaroids.....



Umm...I dunno how I feel about that
Click to expand...

So do I - much smaller scale though - 35mm film and APS-C sensor. But i'm fine with it. If that makes me a bad person, so be it.
 
Bronica SQ with a 40mm or 50mm lens. Of if you want something sexy looking but without the Hasselblad expense or snobbery;) a Bronica EC or S series camera.
 
PeterA said:
Thanks Mark. Is it all manual exposure? If so I do have a hand held metre which would do the trick?
Click to expand...

The Hassy and Bronica can have metered prisms/finders fitted, though I think my preference would still be for a good meter...


(note to self - get yourself a meter and stop fannying around with sunny-16)
 
Forget about metered prisms, my Bronica prism reads two stops out so promptly over exposes everything.
 
Kev M said:
Forget about metered prisms, my Bronica prism reads two stops out so promptly over exposes everything.
Click to expand...

So did the one on my mate's that I used to borrow, hence my comment that I preferred an external meter - I forget which it was... might have been a Sekonik 358:thinking:
 
jamesb84 said:
And no-one thought to mention this to me when I bought an AE-II prism and have been happily snapping away (I really don't use enough MF at the moment so I'm still on the first roll :nuts:)...
Click to expand...

Hopefully yours will be fine - I know for a fact that my mates was knocked about something awful when he was doing wedding 'togging. He's a clumsy beggar at the best of times, and the only cameras he didn't manage to break at some point were his EOS-3's and the preceeding EOS-1N's. I don't even want to think about how many of those Metz hammerhead flash unit's he broke...
 
Thanks to everyone.

Alastair said:
1cm, or 6cm^2.

Square format is a 6x6cm negative, ideal format is a 6x7cm (or 7x6cm) negative.

That probably reflects the budget points as well. You can get a functional 6x9 folder from £10, a square format TLR from £50 upwards, and something like the Mamiya starts at £300+ for a working body with back, lens and viewfinder.

I consider the RB67 my landscape MF camera, the 90mm is a very usable focal length and I've added a 180mm to allow me to better isolate parts of the landscape, which suits my style when shooting the 6x7 format.

What you get for going for the higher end MF cameras is essentially, in terms of increasing cost:
  • Interchangable lenses (not found on folders, or TLRs - except the C330)
  • Interchangable backs (not found on folders, or TLRs; on some bodies will allow a change of format from 6x7 to 6x4.5)
  • Larger format (moving from 6x4.5 to 6x6 or 6x7)
  • Rotatable back (not on all bodies, not relevant to square format but very convenient for 6x7)
  • Better build quality, better lens quality, wider ranges of available lenses
To me the cost/benefit/complexity pay-off peaks with the RB67 Pro S, but YMMV.
Click to expand...

Thanks. A lot to take in and need to go check out prices. I think the quality and availability of lenses will be a big driver for me. If we avoid the Hassy (due to cost) which has the best range of lenses. Would that be the Bronica?

fixedimage said:
@ the OP, if you had money to burn, a Hassy SWC with a digi back to check focus and exposure etc before swapping out to a back containing velvia.

Do you have a spare £20k or so?
Click to expand...

I wish! If only I could win the lottery!
 
I see not many use a one-degree spot meter. With it there is no need to carry a digital camera to check your exposure. You know before taking the picture what areas of the scene will have blown highlights or accent blacks after you tune up to it.
 
jamesb84 said:
And no-one thought to mention this to me when I bought an AE-II prism and have been happily snapping away (I really don't use enough MF at the moment so I'm still on the first roll :nuts:)...
Click to expand...

No need to waste the rest of the roll. I checked how bad mine was by sticking the lining from a lowepro bag to the wall (as it's supposedly 18%grey) and too a reading with the Bronica and with my DSLR to get the difference then dialled in the exposure compensation on all my film backs. Only problem is if I need more than -2 for anything!

You never know, it might just by the SQ prisms that are guff, the ETRS ones might be okay.
 
PeterA said:
Thanks to everyone.
Thanks. A lot to take in and need to go check out prices. I think the quality and availability of lenses will be a big driver for me. If we avoid the Hassy (due to cost) which has the best range of lenses. Would that be the Bronica?
Click to expand...

Well I would have to say Yes to that.

Other 6x6 with changable lens are Mamiya C330 TLR or the Maimya 6 which is a range finder.

Thats if your sticking to square format, if not that the Mamiya RB/RZ67 or the Pentax 67 would be the next choice.
Both got a good range of lens both have there plus and minus points.
 
Of course, we forgot to mention the Kiev 66 if you want 6x6 too. I'd still have a Bronica instead though.
 
Kev M said:
, the ETRS ones might be okay.
Click to expand...

I bought my AE-II new on 19.8.1986 at about 1.30 pm and it's still spot on...probably more accurate than the shutter speed after this time.
 
PeterA said:
Thanks. A lot to take in and need to go check out prices. I think the quality and availability of lenses will be a big driver for me. If we avoid the Hassy (due to cost) which has the best range of lenses. Would that be the Bronica?
Click to expand...

The "range" of lenses might be misleading, if every lens is good quality you don't need a wider range of choices than the focal lengths you use.

Remember that Bronica, Mamiya and Hassy were all professional quality medium format systems (bodies, lenses and accessories) when they were built, and they are still professional quality now.

Get yourself a cheap folding camera that allows you to switch between 6x6 and 6x9 (e.g. Ensign Selfix 420 or 820). Get a few rolls through in both size formats. Decide if 6x6 floats your boat, or if you want a more conventional format. Something cheap, and start shooting MF and just see the size and detail in the negatives.. once you've got some negatives and scans in front of you it will help focus your mind (y)
 
I agree with Alastair, you can get an almost as new Ensign 12-20 (6 x 6) for less than £80 or an 8-20 for about £100, both will produce exceptionally good images.

I think Alastair and I are Ross Ensign fan boys, still they can't arrest you for it.

Andy
 
Andysnap said:
I agree with Alastair, you can get an almost as new Ensign 12-20 (6 x 6) for less than £80 or an 8-20 for about £100, both will produce exceptionally good images.

I think Alastair and I are Ross Ensign fan boys, still they can't arrest you for it.
Click to expand...

I'm just lower budget.. you can pick-up a usable Ensign folder (although probably a little sticky on the slower speeds - that you're unlikely to be using anyway) for £20.. (y)
 
Alastair said:
The Medium Format Manual by Michael Freeman is available from £2-or-so secondhand on Amazon, it's a bit dated, doesn't cover every manufacturer, but it does cover most and I found it a very useful when considering my recent move to medium format.
Click to expand...

Thanks and have ordered so should hopefully arrive soon

Alastair said:
Get yourself a cheap folding camera that allows you to switch between 6x6 and 6x9 (e.g. Ensign Selfix 420 or 820). Get a few rolls through in both size formats. Decide if 6x6 floats your boat, or if you want a more conventional format. Something cheap, and start shooting MF and just see the size and detail in the negatives.. once you've got some negatives and scans in front of you it will help focus your mind (y)
Click to expand...

Andysnap said:
I agree with Alastair, you can get an almost as new Ensign 12-20 (6 x 6) for less than £80 or an 8-20 for about £100, both will produce exceptionally good images.
Andy
Click to expand...

What a great idea. This will give me a good idea as to the difference in formats and a nice price range to find out
 
If you're quick there's an Ensign Selfix 820 on Ebay at the moment (item 110653229180) that could be a bargain if you're prepared to take the gamble that it's fully functional. The seller is reporting that it's been serviced recently.
 
Bloody hell I'm tempted but I just spend over £700 on a lens so I think I may end up dead if I spend anymore. But it looks like a bargain to be had.

Andy
 
£43 + pp absolute bargain if its in good nick.

Andy
 
Andysnap said:
£43 + pp absolute bargain if its in good nick.

Andy
Click to expand...

I think someone's got a bargain..

Mind you, I've picked up the Bertram Chronos lightmeter he was listing with a 99p bid..
 
PeterA said:
Thanks Alastair. Whats the difference between square & ideal?



Thanks Mark. Is it all manual exposure? If so I do have a hand held metre which would do the trick?



Thanks CT. What is the recommended lens for landscape? Is it better to go with a 90 or something wider in this format?
Click to expand...

6X7 was called "ideal format" because it was the same proportion as printing paper, and it would print onto standard printing paper sizes without cropping the negative or the paper.
 
Last edited:
For me the RB67 was pretty much the perfect medium format camera, albeit slower and 'clunkier' than the opposition - loved the rotating back, close focus (bellows) ability, large bright viewfinder...had a Bronica 6x6 later, but didn't like the camera or the format, went to an ETRSi, but guess I just didn't like Bronica's as it spent most of its time in the case. Chopped all the medium format gear in for a Canon DSLR in the end and started taking pictures again.

Paul
 
Ben Myerson said:
6X7 was called "ideal format" because it was the same proportion as printing paper, and it would print onto standard printing paper sizes without cropping the negative or the paper.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Good to know. Waiting for the book at mo

paul williams said:
For me the RB67 was pretty much the perfect medium format camera, albeit slower and 'clunkier' than the opposition - loved the rotating back, close focus (bellows) ability, large bright viewfinder...had a Bronica 6x6 later, but didn't like the camera or the format, went to an ETRSi, but guess I just didn't like Bronica's as it spent most of its time in the case. Paul
Click to expand...

Food for thought. Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top