- Messages
- 417
- Edit My Images
- Yes
and the site receives a small commission
Medium Format
- Thread starter EdinburghGary
- Start date
- Messages
- 5,993
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Actually the H series lenses are all made by Fuji. Who I have alot of respect for when it comes to making top notch glass.
I personally don't think that MF digi has the same feel as working with a film back. They are all great cameras regardless of what's pinned on the back and I use one all the time but it still doesn't feel right to have a MF or LF format camera with beeps and cooling fans.
OP
EdinburghGary
Reply not Report
- Messages
- 19,065
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Its a fair question, and one that Pete Carr keeps throwing at me, and one which I keep trying to dodge
. The long and short of it is simple, I have no need for one. I don't really know why I want one either.Its a combination of hype and gear lust. I read a lot of hype about Medium Format being so much better than 35MM...I also read a lot about Large Format being so much better than Medium Format for example...I read that they can capture so much more detail than any DSLR could ever dream of. And when used right, your shots will simply be the best they can be.
Now the gear lust part. This is the bit I have tried to explain several times to several people, and most don't get it...however its a problem not specific to cameras (I had 7 cars on my drive until recently
). Part of any hobby or obsession (as my wife calls it), involves collecting lots of different models and specs. Its like collecting trading cards on a grander scale. Even if I cannot use the items properly, something in me will drive me to buy it, to just have it. Its not greed, its a curiosity about my hobby, an interest in the other items. Just having these items does it for me. I can give you another example. Myself and Michael (Stressless here), got into RC cars last year. We bought our first one, and wrecked them. Within a month, I had spent over £1,000 on new cars, and bits for them, I got obsessed and went nuts. I have a loft full of STar Trek Toys (£5K splurge on Ebay), and whilst I could probably make the money back over a long time, I just want to keep them.
I have had all the old argument thrown at me "More money than sense" etc. I don't want it to turn into that. Its not a financial discussion, and money should not come into it. Its a discussion I guess about addictive and compulsive personality, and whether or not, said personality problem is a "bad thing".
Photography for me is two things. Good photos first and foremost. Collecting GOOD gear, a very close second.
Maybe I need to see a Doctor
- Messages
- 5,993
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nahh, mostly the cameras you're looking at are beautiful pieces of engineering and are a joy to hold and have even if you never use them. The thing is you will use them and the joy of seeing these fabulous creations do what they were designed to all those many years ago, is even better still.
That's part of why the MF digi experience is actually really flat, even with the mind blowing quality you can achieve.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Maybe I need to see a Doctor
Well that's two of us then.
Seriously - you're a photographer and you're going to be drawn to top end gear - you don't have to feel defensive about it. I've just satisfied a life long ambition by getting a blad, something I couldn't even think about years ago.
I've always had a yen for a Leica, but I doubt I'll get one now as I have the Contax which is just as nice with the benefit of AF and few other niceties which Leica feel is beneath them to introduce.
You dont need to justify anything to anyone - you're a photographer and they're tools you'll use when you want to.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Bah, have to agree. I hate all this modern plastic junk produces nice photos but they don't have the feel of a real camera, so to speak. Gary, I know I keep saying to trust your current gear as its fantastic and you've got plenty to learn, but
Remember what I was saying about the Leica the other day? Its one of the finest cameras ever made. Beautiful design, perfect weight and lovely lenses. Its not cost effective to buy or run but what it will do is make you a better photographer. It'll make you slow down, think differently, and such. Photography is just capturing light so its good to play. Its good to break free of the plastic block of dslr.
OP
EdinburghGary
Reply not Report
- Messages
- 19,065
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Bah, have to agree. I hate all this modern plastic junk produces nice photos but they don't have the feel of a real camera, so to speak. Gary, I know I keep saying to trust your current gear as its fantastic and you've got plenty to learn, but
Trouble is, its just another expensive block of plastic that keeps drawing me in
- Messages
- 5,993
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
An amazing bit of kit Gary and it will lift the quality of your very large prints beyond belief. Some people on here may even say that they can see how much better than a Nikon or Sony it is from the shots you post.
It won't change a thing about the way you work or see your images though. A totally non mechanical, non battery powered camera will.
The answer is as clear as day........ you need to get both.
It won't change a thing about the way you work or see your images though. A totally non mechanical, non battery powered camera will.
The answer is as clear as day........ you need to get both.
Its a fair question, and one that Pete Carr keeps throwing at me, and one which I keep trying to dodge
I have a 1970s Topcon which is great to use. I love the thumb winder arm thing. It feels like you've taken a photo and you're moving on. Its small and light and just lovely. I've got a Canon AE1 which is a thing of beauty. I've got a Lomo LC-A which I adore. It changes the way I take photos and puts me in a place that I can't go to with my 30D. I've got a 1950s Kodak Duaflex. Ace design and I have no idea if it even works. Oh and I also have a Canon EOS50 film SLR. I don't technically need any of these but I wanted them and I want more. I want a Yashica Matt 124, a Contax G3, a Leica M6, a Voightlander, a Polariod sx-70 and more just cos they look like a lot of fun.
- Messages
- 4,347
- Name
- You can call me Sir.
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have had all the old argument thrown at me "More money than sense" etc. I don't want it to turn into that. Its not a financial discussion, and money should not come into it. Its a discussion I guess about addictive and compulsive personality, and whether or not, said personality problem is a "bad thing".
Photography for me is two things. Good photos first and foremost. Collecting GOOD gear, a very close second.
Maybe I need to see a Doctor
I wouldn't use that argument Gary, what you do with your own money is your business and nobody elses. My reason for asking is I've watched your (collection
) grow since you joined and it's not always given you what you wanted, the S5 PRO for example. You might (and I say might because you could prove me wrong) find the same thing with MF. There's no doubt they can produce great results but in average hands like mine they produce average results. I doubt you will see that noticeable increase in quality over digital straight away, it'll take time. On another note, could getting an MF camera set you back if it/you doesn't produce the results you expect from it?
But none of that really matters does it, because if you buy as a collector as well as a photographer then you will probably be satisfied either way. With your collectors hat on you might as well go straight for a blad but if you buy as a photographer I'd say go for a Bronica, it'll be less of a financial investment to start off with and if you get on with it you can always add a blad at a later date.
Best of luck with whatever you choose.
OP
EdinburghGary
Reply not Report
- Messages
- 19,065
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
OP
EdinburghGary
Reply not Report
- Messages
- 19,065
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I wouldn't use that argument Gary, what you do with your own money is your business and nobody elses. My reason for asking is I've watched you (collection
On another note, could getting an MF camera set you back if it/you doesn't produce the results you expect from it?
But none of that really matters does it, because if you buy as a collector as well as a photographer then you will probably be satisfied either way. With your collectors hat on you might as well go straight for a blad but if you buy as a photographer I'd say go for a Bronica, it'll be less of a financial investment to start off with and if you get on with it you can always add a blad at a later date.
Best of luck with whatever you choose.
You make more great points. The S5 Pro I am "learning to love". Its hard. It has lovely colours and appears to have good dynamic range, but the trouble is, as you have pointed out, unless you have your skill nailed in every respect, getting the most from any camera is a long and hard game to crack. I think I will crack it eventually as I am just as obsessive about getting a good photo as I am in collecting good gear. More so I would say. Its my eye for compisition that really lacks at the moment, and when that comes, I will be a very happy bunny
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Bah, have to agree. I hate all this modern plastic junk produces nice photos but they don't have the feel of a real camera, so to speak. Gary, I know I keep saying to trust your current gear as its fantastic and you've got plenty to learn, but
Bloody Hell - I actually agree with most of that!
It's worth drawing a distinction I think though between a 35mm rangefinder and a MF camera.
The very act of taking a shot with a MF camera is a ritual and manual focusing is part of the whole pleasure of it.
For me, using a 35mm rangefinder, that manual focusing becomes a PITA. The 35mm rangefinder is really the ultimate street candid camera, so much quieter and so much more low profile, enabling you to work unnoticed in comparison to a zonking great DSLR. For me AF in a RF camera is a benefit for quicker more instinctive shooting, but still with all the other benefits that a RF camera brings. There are some pretty good alternatives about to the Leica, but you certainly wouldn't be doing anything 'wrong' in getting one.
My reason for asking is I've watched you (collection
Thats what I've been saying too. IMHO buying a S5 when you've got a D3 and some awesome lenses seemed silly. Technically better dynamic range, well you can get much better dynamic range from exposure blending or HDR (dare I say it)
Some of the top wedding photographers use a 5D so there isn't a real dynamic range issue for them so imho its a mute point. But having said if you're looking at film then its a whole other ball game and it will make you think and see differently. I wouldn't go digital MF but I would film. I could use a PS action to fake the Lomo look but theres something so much better about the real thing. An action just applies the same thing in the same way to a photo. Its so uniform. A lens and film react to the light differently every time. The effect is real. Thats why I love my Lomo.A side of you I did not know existed!!
I love old gear. New gear I only buy to get the shot. Old I buy because it still works, because its a way to travel back in time and see the world through the eyes of the 60s or the 50s. I could buy a Leica and see the world through the same lens that Cartier-Bresson saw things. Its amazing.
OP
EdinburghGary
Reply not Report
- Messages
- 19,065
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't think the G3 ever materialised Pete? Rumours still abound about a possible G3 as a digital alternative to the Leica M8, but I think it's just wishful thinking by some - the G2 looks like the end of the line.
I have a friend who has amassed a sizeable collection of Pentax 67 stuff. Five bodies, a shed load of lenses and other attachments, still buying occasionally, and he's not taken a shot in years. He bought a 20D and never used that either. I don't badger him about using them because I know exactly why he does it - the love of owning the hardware.
I do the same myself, to a lesser extent. A while ago I fancied an Olympus OM1 because as a teenager it was the pro camera to have and wildly expensive, so I got one off ebay. Then I saw an OM1N and got that, followed by an OM2. I've used the OM2 only so far - it went across the world with me. I'll get an OM4 one day. I also got 3 Olympus Trip 35s - the original David Bailey advertised camera, and I've used one of them. They were so cheap I had to get more in case one turned out bad.
I got a Lomo LC-A which turned out to be total crap because it actually takes good pictures. I must have got one out of a batch of failures. So I got a Holga recently, and I'm just coming to the end of a roll of 20+ year old colour print film. Hopefully they'll be appalling.
Sixteen months ago I acquired a Horseman LX-C 5x4 and I have yet to use it. I did buy it with this intention, but it's not the sort of thing that lends itself to chucking in the car and taking a few snapshots. But I also bought it because it looks so technically magnificent. It's not a traditional old style or wood and brass camera. It's so modern looking somebody once thought that the viewing screen was an lcd. It even has a focusing computer, which I have yet to master. It stands in the corner of my room, master of all that it surveys, and I intend to make a big effort to use it over Christmas.
As for the digital v film comments here, when I got my Fuji GSW690 it got it's first outing on a trip to S Africa then New Zealand. But it was such a huge brick to haul around the world after that I put it away for a couple of years. Then last year I looked through the Velvia slides, and the amateur home flatbed scans I'd done and thought this has got to come out again. So it went to the US and New Zealand again - 50 rolls of Velvia. Half have been developed so far, and the rest I'm about to send off. I'm looking in to getting them professionally scanned, then I'll put some more up here.
Gary, if you really do have a buying compulsion, there's only one sensible answer. A bigger house.
I do the same myself, to a lesser extent. A while ago I fancied an Olympus OM1 because as a teenager it was the pro camera to have and wildly expensive, so I got one off ebay. Then I saw an OM1N and got that, followed by an OM2. I've used the OM2 only so far - it went across the world with me. I'll get an OM4 one day. I also got 3 Olympus Trip 35s - the original David Bailey advertised camera, and I've used one of them. They were so cheap I had to get more in case one turned out bad.
I got a Lomo LC-A which turned out to be total crap because it actually takes good pictures. I must have got one out of a batch of failures. So I got a Holga recently, and I'm just coming to the end of a roll of 20+ year old colour print film. Hopefully they'll be appalling.
Sixteen months ago I acquired a Horseman LX-C 5x4 and I have yet to use it. I did buy it with this intention, but it's not the sort of thing that lends itself to chucking in the car and taking a few snapshots. But I also bought it because it looks so technically magnificent. It's not a traditional old style or wood and brass camera. It's so modern looking somebody once thought that the viewing screen was an lcd. It even has a focusing computer, which I have yet to master. It stands in the corner of my room, master of all that it surveys, and I intend to make a big effort to use it over Christmas.
As for the digital v film comments here, when I got my Fuji GSW690 it got it's first outing on a trip to S Africa then New Zealand. But it was such a huge brick to haul around the world after that I put it away for a couple of years. Then last year I looked through the Velvia slides, and the amateur home flatbed scans I'd done and thought this has got to come out again. So it went to the US and New Zealand again - 50 rolls of Velvia. Half have been developed so far, and the rest I'm about to send off. I'm looking in to getting them professionally scanned, then I'll put some more up here.
Gary, if you really do have a buying compulsion, there's only one sensible answer. A bigger house.
- Messages
- 5,450
- Name
- April 2008
- Edit My Images
- No
This seems an appropriate place to mention this...
Holga 120WPC Wide Angle PinHole
Medium format for those on a budget. Worth having a play with? Too hit and miss to learn anything from?
I keep on looking at various Holga/Lomo cameras and this looks interesting for some dreamy landscapes.
Holga 120WPC Wide Angle PinHole
Medium format for those on a budget. Worth having a play with? Too hit and miss to learn anything from?
I keep on looking at various Holga/Lomo cameras and this looks interesting for some dreamy landscapes.
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You could always get a press camera like Charlie Waite....
- Messages
- 4,666
- Edit My Images
- Yes
lol
and me!
I wouldn't recommend LF to anyone til they have some experience of film, unless they have bottomless pockets. At £2.00+ a shot for Velvia then processing on top it aint cheap everytime you press the shutter. However, you can get cheap B&W film from china for £13 for 50 sheets and dev/scan at home which certainly makes it cheaper!
Gary, if you feel it will help your photography, you can afford it and it's something you are interested in then why are you agonising over it?
and me!
I wouldn't recommend LF to anyone til they have some experience of film, unless they have bottomless pockets. At £2.00+ a shot for Velvia then processing on top it aint cheap everytime you press the shutter. However, you can get cheap B&W film from china for £13 for 50 sheets and dev/scan at home which certainly makes it cheaper!
Gary, if you feel it will help your photography, you can afford it and it's something you are interested in then why are you agonising over it?
I'm finding that you need time to do MF properly. With digi I can grab a camera and a lens or two and off I go. With MF it's tripod time and light meter time and loading and changing backs takes time, and the developing takes time too.
If you are fine in taking time and slowing everything RIGHT down then MF will make you look longer at a scene in front of you, will make you look more at the light because you start to think how that light will react with film and you start to visualise what is in front of you rather than grabbing a digital and blasting away until you get it right.
I find myself looking at scenes, even at home and going hmmmmmm 1/60 at f5.3..........
Ok so perhaps you are not the only one here in need of a doctor
If you are fine in taking time and slowing everything RIGHT down then MF will make you look longer at a scene in front of you, will make you look more at the light because you start to think how that light will react with film and you start to visualise what is in front of you rather than grabbing a digital and blasting away until you get it right.
I find myself looking at scenes, even at home and going hmmmmmm 1/60 at f5.3..........
Ok so perhaps you are not the only one here in need of a doctor
- Messages
- 2,659
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm finding that you need time to do MF properly. With digi I can grab a camera and a lens or two and off I go. With MF it's tripod time and light meter time and loading and changing backs takes time, and the developing takes time too.
If you are fine in taking time and slowing everything RIGHT down then MF will make you look longer at a scene in front of you, will make you look more at the light because you start to think how that light will react with film and you start to visualise what is in front of you rather than grabbing a digital and blasting away until you get it right.
I find myself looking at scenes, even at home and going hmmmmmm 1/60 at f5.3..........
Ok so perhaps you are not the only one here in need of a doctor
Thank goodness for that!
Completely agree with you regarding slowing everything down. I went out this morning for some landscaping shots at a nearby park and hauled all the MF stuff with me - two bags one with camera, extra film, lightmeter, filters etc. and another with tripod. What a schlep! I couldn't help but wonder if I was going to encounter someone with a little DSLR snapping away 300 shots like there's no tomorrow
And here's me taking 10-15 minutes on each shot, setting up the tripod, checking the light meter readings, bracketing every shot... After 2 hours of walking around the park I'd been through 2 rolls of film and only 30 shots of which I'll probably keep 10... and now I'm developing the rolls which will take the rest of the afternoon. Scanning and then processing on the computer will probably take up the rest of my evening. Sure it takes a lot of time, but every one of the shots I keep will look fantastic and feel like I've 'made' the shot instead of 'taken' it...
Not dissing digital - it certainly has it's place. I just feel more passionate about my photography when using MF. Still, I always use digital when doing 'jobs' for other people - easier and more reliable. Film is for pleasure.
- Messages
- 8,757
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
The thing I notice first about L/F, is distortion....or lack of it.
Can't decide whether that's a good thing or a bit anal..:shrug:
how about getting a 35mm film camera first? I will give you a good chance to play around with different types of film, and find out a bit more about the developing process reasonably cheaply. A second hand F5 or F100 will cost under £200 and you can use the lenses you already have.