Medium Format Help.

SealBeard

SealBeard

Messages
2,070
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
No
Hi everyone, I'm planning to have a plunge into some MF photography after being persuaded by some friends :bonk:

I generally do studio work, but am also looking to do some location work with flash also.

I must admit to not knowing exactly what I want which is why I'm writing his post in the hope you guys can point me in the right direction :)

The models I have been thinking about so far include in order of preff:

* Contax 645 AF (because it looks super sexy! - but not sure I can stretch to the cost)
* Hassleblad 501 or similar (leaf shutters could come in very handy for the flash work i think)
*Mamiya 645 Pro - A friend has one of these and it looks to be a great piece of kit, but with a sync speed of 1/60 ish, its not the best for me I dont think.

Please could anyone give me some more options advice? I would very much appreciate it :)

Rob.
 
Ujjwal has a Pentax 645 AF he could be talked into letting go I reckon, the rest seem way over-priced to me. I do like the Contax though :D
 
Bronica ETRSi ?

An excellent but heavy 6X7 Mamiya RB67pro?
 
Personally Rob, I will say, Hasselblad 500 CM.

It's 6X6, a very interesting and different format. You might enjoy using it, if you haven't done it before. Its a bit different that using a 135mm. 645 is rather similar to 135 format (m format wise, not size of negative, obviously)

The camera is iconic; an absolute beauty to use, and if you are going to use flash, leaf shutter is almost a necessity ( I am assuming its sort of models-on-location type shoot. ) That said, all 645 cameras ( which are not leaf shutter) have leaf shutter lenses of atleast 80mm which is a bit more expensive, but gets around the problem.

The lens on Hasselblad is superb.

The prices are affordable now. about 500 quids for a body plus 80mm ; and around 150-170 quids for the 150mm.

But of course i'll love it if you buy my Pentax 645n, when I list it on the Sales corner :D
 
Last edited:
I would also look at the mamiya Rb and RZ ranges as well. They are great cameras with leaf shutters.
 
Because of the brand, the larger negatives and the sexy Zeiss lenses I'd go for the 'blad every time. Then again this isn't my money, they're bloody expensive!
 
Mr_T said:
Because of the brand, the larger negatives and the sexy Zeiss lenses I'd go for the 'blad every time. Then again this isn't my money, they're bloody expensive!
Click to expand...

actually, of the 3 he lists, Contax is far more expensive than Hassy 500CM. 500C is even cheaper.
 
ujjwaldey8165 said:
actually, of the 3 he lists, Contax is far more expensive than Hassy 500CM. 500C is even cheaper.
Click to expand...

Ah, didn't see that it was AF. What about including lenses?
 
6x6 is a wonderful format to work in and the blad 500 is the iconic choice. Bronica SQ is optically fab at a fraction of the cost.

645 is very managable but the negs aren't not that much bigger than 35mm. The contax is the nicest handling, best looking and cream of the bunch. Mamiya is the working standard, great kit and the lenses are superb.

6x7 is a beast, RB67 is really the only choice here. RZ if you
must. ;)
 
When I was in business, I used an RB67. Superb.(y)
 
ujjwaldey8165 said:
Sorry, not sure what your question is MrT.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it wasn't made very clear :bonk:. I was wondering what the difference in cost would be between the two in terms of the prices of lenses for both systems.
 
Contax 645 is more expensive, compared to C T* lenses, even the black bodied ones. Also there are many more Hassy lens, some is pretty well used conditions which are available at pretty god prices
 
Rob_Ashton said:
*Mamiya 645 Pro - A friend has one of these and it looks to be a great piece of kit, but with a sync speed of 1/60 ish, its not the best for me I dont think.
Click to expand...

Depends which lenses you buy.

If you get M645 lenses with a built-in leaf shutter, you can sync flash at any speed. They are a bit more expensive, though.

Not really my province, but I'd be tempted by the Blad for the Zeiss glass if nothing else, though then you're talking serious money. As mentioned earlier, if you're after something different, then 6x6 certainly offers it.
 
An MF camera will soon be on my shopping list and those mentioned were models I too was looking at. Other than a Hassleblad that went for under £50 (don't ask) I haven't seen many bargains.

Is the Hassey 500 actually twice as good as the ones we can pick up for £250?

Are the MF cameras with bigger frame size that bit better quality ie is 6x7 much better than 6x5 or 6x6
 
ujjwaldey8165 said:
I didn't know you were interested in philosophical debates, Darren :LOL::LOL::LOL:
Click to expand...

I did call out the name of a popular deity when I was talking to a chap in Lytham who often scours second hand shops and told me of a shop over at East Lancs where he bought a Hassleblad. He went in and asked about it after seeing it. They told him "Oh it doesn't work and part of it is missing". He asked how much and I think he said that they gave it to him for £45 (I did post about this at the time). He got it home and it was virtually perfect and the "Missing" part was the film cassette. He bought one off Ebay and had one working MF camera. Git.
 
My Hasselblad 501CM cost me £1150 quid complete, and it's indistinguishable from new. Is that really considered expensive for a working tool which will last your lifetime, especially compared to the cost of your averge DSLR which will be a paperweight when the blad is still working? 6X6 isn't my ideal format, but the build quality of the camera is in another league and it's a joy to use apart from focusing which is a pig. You really need a focusing magnifier or magnifying prism. although many people just fit a split image screen which solves a lot of the difficulty.

The RB67 is even more of a bargain - you can get very clean ones for silly money and the larger neg and aspect ratio is nicer for me. It lacks the finesse of the blad, but it's built like a tank and is pretty well indestructible.
 
Last edited:
I seem to be drawn towards a Hassleblad but I don't know if it is just the name. I am looking for a colour MF enlarger first though preferably one that will do at least 6x7. I am determined to develop all my own film if at all possible (and will be doing my first ever wet prints tomorrow :))
 
I agree CT, focusing a hassleblad is a complete mission but they are very nice to use and the images they produce are in a different league imho.
 
I've always liked the look of film images and wanted to go for a medium format camera myself. I like how these old things are built like tanks and are still popular, yet still produce very beautiful details.
After much research (though not enough) i've recently bought a Mamiya RZ67 ProII, though i have yet to get a lens. I've pretty much jumped into a big dark hole here and really dont know what else I need.

It's really only gonna be used for portraiture.
 
Denyerec said:
Bag an RB67 Pro II on Ebay, can get one with lenses for under £700. Superb studio 6x7 rig, just about light enough to use in the field without needing a sherpa.
Click to expand...

Stop it, you are all trying to temp me..... Just spent £460 today on even more studio equipment so literally no money left............ (and I still don't have a proper background!)
 
Last edited:
I love both the blad and the RB67 for different reasons, but I'd probably have to choose the RB as a serious working tool out of the two.The rotating back is brilliant, you can pick up lenses, mag backs and other bits quite reasonably, whereas the cost of lenses for the blad can get exhorbitant. The nicest thing of all is that the image on the screen just snaps in and out of focus very positively on the RB67 due to the bellows focusing.The screen image on the blad is unbelievably bright, but it doesn't make it any easier to focus. :D

The RB67 was the chosen tool of more studio photographers particularly, but plenty of other users too, for good reason.
 
CT said:
I love both the blad and the RB67 for different reasons, but I'd probably have to choose the RB as a serious working tool out of the two.The rotating back is brilliant, you can pick up lenses, mag backs and other bits quite reasonably, whereas the cost of lenses for the blad can get exhorbitant. The nicest thing of all is that the image on the screen just snaps in and out of focus very positively on the RB67 due to the bellows focusing.The screen image on the blad is unbelievably bright, but it doesn't make it any easier to focus. :D

The RB67 was the chosen tool of more studio photographers particularly, but plenty of other users too, for good reason.
Click to expand...

I just wish I knew someone round here with one so I could try it. I want it for studio work AND landscapes doing all the developing myself.
 
cowasaki said:
I just wish I knew someone round here with one so I could try it. I want it for studio work AND landscapes doing all the developing myself.
Click to expand...

It's the size and weight of the RB which puts a lot of people off, but I don't find it a problem, in fact I think it's the fact that it's such a beast which makes me love it - like picking up a Rottweiller pup. The assembled camera just drops in a small gadget bag and the weight is far less than the average kit people cart about with them these days. :shrug:
 
CT said:
It's the size and weight of the RB which puts a lot of people off, but I don't find it a problem, in fact I think it's the fact that it's such a beast which makes me love it - like picking up a Rottweiller pup. The assembled camera just drops in a small gadget bag and the weight is far less than the average kit people cart about with them these days. :shrug:
Click to expand...

The camera size really does not matter to me especially in the studio. I do not understand all the different models and which lenses etc so I think I will need to do some research unless of course someone fancies doing a really good introduction to MF cameras thread and we could ask to it do to stickied. I am sure that it would be helpful all around.
 
Last edited:
cowasaki said:
The camera size really does not matter to me especially in the studio. I do not understand all the different models and which lenses etc so I think I will need to do some research unless of course something fancies doing a really good introduction to MF cameras thread and we could ask to it do to stickied. I am sure that it would be helpful all around.
Click to expand...

Please don't do this anyone
(request from Mr BigYin's Bank Manager)
 
cowasaki said:
The camera size really does not matter to me especially in the studio. I do not understand all the different models and which lenses etc so I think I will need to do some research unless of course something fancies doing a really good introduction to MF cameras thread and we could ask to it do to stickied. I am sure that it would be helpful all around.
Click to expand...

The RBs are pretty straightforward.

The RB67 was the first camera and it's a beaut. The only problem really with it is that there aren't any interlocks on it to prevent double exposing shots, and nowhere to store the dark slide on the camera.

The RB67 Pro S added foolproof double exposure locks although you can override them, and they added a place on the camera body to store the dark slide when not in the mag. Very little difference between the two at all but I'd advocate the Pro S of the two models.

The RB 67 Pro SD introduced a newly designed mag back and soime other cosmetic differences as well as a lens mount which takes the K Series lenses.

The RZ67 introduced a plastic body and a degree of automation along with battery dependancy. It also changed the lens mount to accept some new lenses which were designated K Series.

The Hasselblad model range is a bit of nightmare to unravel especially as a later model number doesn't necessarily indicate a newer or more advanced model, so the best advice I can give you is post here if you see something you fancy, but don't just jump in.
 
Last edited:
The standard lens on MF cameras is usually around 75 to 90mm and it's roughly the equivalent of a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera. Portait lenses therefore need to be longer than that depending on taste.

At the other end 50mm is quite wide, while 40 or 30mm is very wide, and those lenses tend to be wallet busting prices!
 
CT said:
The standard lens on MF cameras is usually around 75 to 90mm and it's roughly the equivalent of a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera. Portait lenses therefore need to be longer than that depending on taste.

At the other end 50mm is quite wide, while 40 or 30mm is very wide, and those lenses tend to be wallet busting prices!
Click to expand...

This is the kind of thing that I just wouldn't have known! Seriously would be helpful a sort of beginners guide. Things like the film cassette being a seperate part and stuff like that are all new to use people that have never had one.
 
cowasaki said:
This is the kind of thing that I just wouldn't have known! Seriously would be helpful a sort of beginners guide. Things like the film cassette being a seperate part and stuff like that are all new to use people that have never had one.
Click to expand...

It would be a pretty onerous task to try and write that sort of guide as there are vast differences between models although there are common similarities.

What you refer to as the film cassette is usually called the film back or the magazine back. The beauty of these backs is that they're pre-loaded with film and enable you to swap film type mid- roll at any time, for example from mono to colour., so only having one mag back is limiting your options quite a bit.

That's what the dark slide is for - you take it out to take shots and put it back in the mag back when you want to remove the back as it stops the film being exposed when not in use. When you want to resume using that film, replace the mag back on the camera, pull out the dark slide and you're good to go and start shooting again.

Most makes offer both 120 and 220 film backs. 220 film is thinner and you get double the amount of exposures you'd get on 120 film. The problem is it's getting harder to get 220 film ,let alone someone to process it, consequently 220 mag backs are less sought after these days than 120 backs.
 
Last edited:
CT said:
It would be a pretty onerous task to try and write that sort of guide as there are vast differences between models although there are common similarities.

What you refer to as the film cassette is usually called the film back or the magazine back. The beauty of these backs is that they're pre-loaded with film and enable you to swap film type mid- roll at any time, for example from mono to colour., so only having one mag back is limiting your options quite a bit.

That's what the dark slide is for - you take it out to take shots and put it back in the mag back when you want to remove the back as it stops the film being exposed when not in use. When you want to resume using that film, replace the mag back on the camera, pull out the dark slide and you're good to go and start shooting again.
Click to expand...

Cheers. I am more interested in black and white but having the ability to have a second back with colour film in would be wonderful. I was given a Ektar 25 film to practice loading my film tank with but luckily I was given some more film and didn't need to waste it that way. Can you get all the same films for the larger format
 
The amount of MF film is getting less these days, but you can get Kodak Ektar and all the Ilford stock is available in 120 formats.

Fuji still do some 120 stuff but not sure which. I know you can get Velvia in 120.

I looked at getting a Hasselblad 500 series but eventually ended up with a Bronica SQ-Ai kit, which is cheaper then the Hasselblad and I have compared slide film from my Bronica and a friends Hasselblad and to be honest it is difficult to tell which machine they were taken on.

However I am lusting after a Hasselbald SWC or a Pentax 67
 
Knikki said:
The amount of MF film is getting less these days, but you can get Kodak Ektar and all the Ilford stock is available in 120 formats.

Fuji still do some 120 stuff but not sure which. I know you can get Velvia in 120.

I looked at getting a Hasselblad 500 series but eventually ended up with a Bronica SQ-Ai kit, which is cheaper then the Hasselblad and I have compared slide film from my Bronica and a friends Hasselblad and to be honest it is difficult to tell which machine they were taken on.

However I am lusting after a Hasselbald SWC or a Pentax 67
Click to expand...

Brilliant, after seeing the results with the Ektar I want to try more so it would be brilliant. The Ilford stuff will be my bread and butter film as I will be developing it myself.
 
cowasaki said:
I just wish I knew someone round here with one so I could try it. I want it for studio work AND landscapes doing all the developing myself.
Click to expand...

You'll have a surprise looking down at the viewfinder on the RB67 as the image is so bright and large esp when the magnifier is used, the horizontal being reversed takes some getting used too though.
The 180mm lens is one of my favourites and there is one going on gumtree for £65.
 
Darren, I have a book called the Medium Format Manual- which deals with all the camera makes, types, parts lens etc. Happy to send it to you if you pay for the postage both ways ( I only ask that because the postage could be a few quids easily each way)
 
I will probably get the enlarger this year and possibly the C41 developing stuff (I like the look of those setups where it keeps your film cannister and chemicals at the right temp and rotates the cannister :)). The MF camera will be in the new year but I want the developing stuff in place first as I do not want to be sending stuff off. I have joined the dark side of the dark side and like it here :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top