Introduction camera for medium format?

aaronseymour

TPF Noob!
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hey. I am interested in getting in to medium format photography but know only a little about how the various brands and makes compare in terms of price and quality. I am mostly interested in portraiture and landscape. What would people suggest for a second hand purchase? I don't need all the bells and whistles (AF etc) but would like something that I could expand on over time (rather than buying a TLR and then upgrading to a SLR later).

Thanks.
 
I'm in the same boat. Been shooting 35mm for years with digital just entering into the picture recently. I collect older pentax's and just could not pass up a chance to get my hands on a Pentax 645 with 72mm f2.8 lens when it was offered to me to sweeten a deal on several cameras. Total cost of body, 72mm lens and a 120 back came to about $275. Its simple very similar feel to Pentax's ME line of 35mm bodies. For $135 I got a 150mm f3.5 to play arond with it.

Simply put... the medium format produces some really nice images.....
 
i would suggest Bronica, Mamiya
they are good and not too expensive
 
On the medium format megasite (http://medfmt.8k.com) there is an interesting example of "progression" into medium format...

Q. What is the usual sequence of MF cameras for a limited budget buyer?

Most medium format photographers seem to go through several stages, viz.:

-an entry level budget TLR stage, e.g., using YashicaMat or Rolleicord
-an SLR stage, such as Bronica or Kiev
-a format change to add 6x7cm, 6x4.5cm, or even 6x9 (folder..)
-a flexibility stage using rangefinder, press camera or view cameras

Not everyone goes through all steps, or in the same sequence. But medium format doesn't limit you to one format or one composition option. Exploring those options is a major part of the fun and learning in store for you in medium format photography!
In my case, my first medium format camera was the plastic Holga toy camera :)

My second was a Russian Kiev 88 (w/inaccurate shutter speeds, plus shutter curtain ripped later on!). Paid about $90 for this thing. Basically a Hasselblad imitation. Gave it away to my friend as a paperweight.

My third was the Pentacon Six TL. Not very expensive (under $200 in very good condition) Nice optics (Carl Zeiss Jena) but it's very big and heavy, the viewfinder is VERY dim (plus cutoff) and much vibration from mirror-slap. Sold this one later on Ebay.

My fourth was the Mamiya RB67 Pro-S. 6x7 format. Very large camera that's attached to a tripod almost all the time. K/L lenses are very sharp.

My fifth (and favorite) after saving up, is the Hasselblad 500cm. I like it best because it's more portable than my Mamiya, and the Zeiss lenses are terrific.
 
MF is at an altime low in price right now. You can get RB67s for $400 in great shape or Bronica ETRS for under $400. These cameras are amazing machines adn easy to use. Check out the forum classified sections such as this deal on PhotoNet, a great buy... http://www.photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=615606

Oh don't be fooled into thinking digital is cheaper, it's not. Paper is as expensive as by B&W double weight fiber paper and ink is about $100/set and you'll never be happy with the printer you have and the camera you buy today is obsolete in a year, or as someone put it, just been outdated. It seems film is timeless and consistant, with the exceptions of the gagets bells n whistles that aren't needed to make an image. A camera is only a box to hold your film in place while you open the lens, not a computer to interpret your images.

Now the real question is do you want a good quality lens and a quality box, or as many gagets in a camera as you can get for your money?
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top