Favourite medium format?......

[philipus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Andy, Mani, these are two very nice photos.

br

Philip

 

 

I bought two Hasselblads 501cm's in the first flush of my film enthusiasm four/five years ago. I was so pleased with the first one (a perfectly functional used camera) that I then bought a new-in-box kit with new lens and A12 back for a hefty price. It took me a while to realize that I actually didn't like using the camera, and preferred pretty much all my other MF setups: the Mamiya 6 was better for landscapes, the Mamiya645 together with the 80mm f1,9 was better for portraits, and most surprising of all, the Arax 60 with it's overlapping frames and myriad other faults just had more character. 

 

I also hated the clunky feeling shutters, and the fussiness of lens-changing. 

 

So I sold it over on RFF for about half what I'd paid for it: a price that overflowed my inbox with offers within half a day (so demand appears to be as strong as ever).

 

Here's an example of the flawed output from the Arax - just a screenshot of a PDF with some summer images I have on my laptop (which I see is further compressed by the forum upload process) - but it gives a rough idea (including an unintentional scanning fault). The Arax is an ugly and clumsy beast, but I do love it. Never felt that way about the Hasselblad.

 

Screen-Shot-smaller.jpg

 

_{(replaced the image with a slightly better size)}

 

 

 

It's interesting - back in the heyday (1960-2000), U.S. pro photographers favored Hassy - Europeans pros favored the Rollei 66/SLX/6000 SLR systems (same Zeiss lens designs in many cases). I know my Leica rep sold, and preferred, the Rolleis (no bias there ).

 

Hassys (outside of the digitals) are: actually rather cheap these days (if you stick with the 500C/M bodies and C lenses), non-battery-dependent (unlike the later Rolleis), and in pretty good supply. A Mamiya 7 + 80mm usually costs more than a 500C/M + 80mm, and my antique Agfa sometimes (as someone pointed out above) costs as much as a 500C/M-80mm combo.

 

I've always preferred the idea of a really compact direct-viewfinder 6x6 (Mamiya 6, SWC, Zeiss or whatever folder - but not 6x7/6x9: if I want rectangles, I use my M10) - and only took my "fling" with SLR Hassies because they were relatively easy to come across, and cheapish. I used a Yashica D way back when, but in coming back to MF after 40 years, I just can't get my head around reversed viewing anymore, at least for faster work. Nor the weight of a prism - thus my excitement in finding the Super-Isolette.

 

Like a Leica, it can't do everything (macro or telephoto) - but it can do what I want.

 

ag4cream.jpg

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ramarren]

I'm always surprised how heavy that 50 C is when I pick it up, being used to the tube of air that is the 80 FE. It's one very solid piece of engineering. I'm not thrilled about its handling though. The focus ring is really difficult to use since it is so close to the camera body. And those knurls are unpleasant to grab on to as well, and with a very long focus throw one has to turn the ring seemingly forever sometimes. Plus I'm unthrilled about the shutter speed and aperture interlock.

 

What really quite cool about the Carl Zeiss lenses though is that there hasn't been so many changes to their optical design over the years. So buying C T* lenses in good shape can be a great way to get amazing image quality for comparably little money.

 

On that note, I'm still testing the lens and don't know how accurate its times are. They do sound OK but it's difficult to tell with the shutter and mirror sound from the camera drowning out the shutter sound from the lens. The aperture also does seem to stick a bit when I stop down so I fear the lens is in need of a service but I got it for very little so I figured I'd try it out, esp. with my PC Mutar. But with that, which has a 1.4x extension, a 50mm is almost too long so a 40mm is what I need. Luckily I recently found one and it is slowly making its way to me. Then I'll decide what to do with the 50 C.

 

 

I finally bought a pair of the Hasselblad Rapid Focusing Lever attachments for the C lenses (there are two sizes..). Now focusing is easy.

[pico]

The mentions of viewfinder cameras and ergonomics reminds me of a pleasant surprise. The Brooks-Plaubel Veriwide has a Rollei-specific tripod fitting which takes Rollei's beautifully ergonomic rapid mounting hand grip. When using the grip, the camera presses against the face, the right arm across the body (and left hand if you use it). It is the steadiest hand grip I've ever used.

 

The Veriwide also uses Rollei camera strap clips and it originally came with a Leica viewfinder.

 

I put one together with a small laser rangefinder. Someday I'll post pictures to the appropriate site.

[adan]

If you want "most expensive" in film MF - look no further than the late Fujifilm/Voigtlander 6x7/6x6 rangefinders: the 667/GF670 folder and the 55mm non-folding wide version. Discontinued new, and the used prices are as high or higher than the new prices were.

 

https://www.cameraquest.com/voigtl_bessa_iii_wide.htm

[A miller]

If you want "most expensive" in film MF - look no further than the late Fujifilm/Voigtlander 6x7/6x6 rangefinders: the 667/GF670 folder and the 55mm non-folding wide version. Discontinued new, and the used prices are as high or higher than the new prices were.

 

https://www.cameraquest.com/voigtl_bessa_iii_wide.htm

Been there and done that with that camera. Pure fool's gold imho

[Bateleur]

Yes made me laugh too

 

We need more MF camera gear pictures in this thread...

 

As someone wisely said ...

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Leica X-Vario

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Been there and done that with that camera. Pure fool's gold imho

 

I respect your opinion. What did you find unfavorable?

.

[EoinC]

This is for sale in Singapore for SGD $1,600...

[A miller]

I respect your opinion. What did you find unfavorable?

.

 

Pico -

 

To me, it is like the difference between a slice of pizza from Joe's on 6th Avenue in the Village http://www.joespizzanyc.com  and a slice from Domino's.  

Either will satisfy your desperate craving for pizza; but if they are each equally accessible you'll no doubt be a loyal Joe's customer.

 

I thought the IQ of the Bessa was nifty.  But that's where the "fool's gold" analogy comes in.  Ultimately, the Skopar lens just didn't wow me.  In particular, the colors and contrast (not in the inverse histogram curve sense but rather in the ability to capture details in shadows as well as bright highlights) didn't come through as they do with my MF Zeiss lenses. 

 

I am very happy with my clunky Hasselblads and my 25 pound Linhof Technika Press 6x9 which, with is custom Zeiss lenses, is like my Hasselblads on steroids.

[almoore]

Ultimately, the Skopar lens just didn't wow me.

 

How much wow factor does a medium format lens need?

 

Fuji rangefinders - in their many variations - have made some of the most beautiful photographs I've ever seen. 

[A miller]

 

 

How much wow factor does a medium format lens need?

 

Fuji rangefinders - in their many variations - have made some of the most beautiful photographs I've ever seen.

 

You are wowed.

 

I am not.

 

Courses for horses....i guess

[almoore]

You are wowed.

 

Not especially by the lenses, but by the images that Fuji cameras are clearly capable of taking. Very few photographs are going to made or broken by minor differences between Fuji and Zeiss lenses. 

[david strachan]

This is for sale in Singapore for SGD $1,600...

Fabulous Eoin. I would buy it in a second...unfortunately due to far too many cameras, my seconds have slowed to hours.

 

Trust you are well.

[pico]

This is for sale in Singapore for SGD $1,600...

http://gallery.clubsnap.com/data/500/medium/brooks-V.jpg

 

That's a decent price for the f/8 version (the f/5.6 is better), but it is not the camera I was describing, the compact Plaubel Veriwide, which is very difficult to find in good looking condition largely because it had a thin silver paint. I have two of each type, one Brooks brand I converted to a 4x5 and universal back for roll film and sheet film. Strange thing. Below.

 

[honcho]

Not especially by the lenses, but by the images that Fuji cameras are clearly capable of taking. Very few photographs are going to made or broken by minor differences between Fuji and Zeiss lenses. 

 

Much of my pre-digital work relied on the M7(ii) and the 43mm Sekor, also a biogon design which still is regarded by many as better than the Zeiss 38mm of the SWC cameras.  The Fuji GX617 that I was also using with the Fujinon SWD 90, 180mm and T300 lenses is a unique camera and the Fuji lenses are at least as good as the super angulon XL lenses as used with the Linhof 617 cameras.

 

When I compare transparecies made with my Fujinon lenses with those I made with my Cambo Wide and super-angulon 47xl, the Fuji transparencies are and more detailed, vibrant and pure, where the Schneider transparencies are softer with more muted colours and gentle tones.

 

The Fuji GSW690iii was the camera that left my Mamiya 7(ii) redundant, I eventually sold the entire Mamiya 7 kit and continued almost exclusively with my Fuji Rangefinders. The Fujinon 65mm is an astonishing lens on the 6x9 format, correctly exposed Velvia transparencies leap off the lightbox and it is not solely due to their sheer size.  I still have those Fuji cameras and use them regularly for personal use these days. 

 

A few years ago, Fujifilm UK gave me a GFW670 to use on extended loan.  Eventually I had to return it and was very tempted to buy one, the transparencies I made with it are equally as good as those I made with my Mamiya 7(ii),  it is an even more portable camera and perfect for travel 

 

I have thousands of transparencies in my archive taken with Fuji, Zeiss, Schneider and Mamiya lenses.   I can't say that any one of those lenses, or lens manufacturers are 'better' than the rest.   Such statements are only of value to the person making them and are as absurd as comparing lenses to pizzas.

[philipus]

Very interesting camera, I have never seen one of those. Is it bolted to the table?

br

Philip

 

That's a decent price for the f/8 version (the f/5.6 is better), but it is not the camera I was describing, the compact Plaubel Veriwide, which is very difficult to find in good looking condition largely because it had a thin silver paint. I have two of each type, one Brooks brand I converted to a 4x5 and universal back for roll film and sheet film. Strange thing. Below.

 

[philipus]

A rather poor Hipstamatic shot of a recent arrival, the 40/4 CFE. I'm quite amazed how much better this one balances with the camera compared to the 50/4 C.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[almoore]

A few years ago, Fujifilm UK gave me a GFW670 to use on extended loan...

A friend of mine has the Fuji 67 folder which is a beautiful camera.

 

I've never owned any of the Fujis, but I've liked every one that I've tried. The recent ones are really elegant and the earlier ones have an endearing industrial feel to them. Back in the 90s, Fuji UK loaned me a 617 for a particular project I was working on and I found it and the results it gave to be faultless.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[A miller]

Not especially by the lenses, but by the images that Fuji cameras are clearly capable of taking. Very few photographs are going to made or broken by minor differences between Fuji and Zeiss lenses. 

 

I strongly disagree.  Otherwise, Zeiss would have been out of business a long time ago.   And so would Leica.  

 

All I can say that is that I bought one of those Bessa 667Ws a couple of years ago, boasted about it on this very thread, shot with it with every intention of loving it, and didn't like the image quality.  And so I sold it.  

 

If it works for you, all the more power to you. 

[A miller]

Much of my pre-digital work relied on the M7(ii) and the 43mm Sekor, also a biogon design which still is regarded by many as better than the Zeiss 38mm of the SWC cameras.  The Fuji GX617 that I was also using with the Fujinon SWD 90, 180mm and T300 lenses is a unique camera and the Fuji lenses are at least as good as the super angulon XL lenses as used with the Linhof 617 cameras.

 

When I compare transparecies made with my Fujinon lenses with those I made with my Cambo Wide and super-angulon 47xl, the Fuji transparencies are and more detailed, vibrant and pure, where the Schneider transparencies are softer with more muted colours and gentle tones.

 

The Fuji GSW690iii was the camera that left my Mamiya 7(ii) redundant, I eventually sold the entire Mamiya 7 kit and continued almost exclusively with my Fuji Rangefinders. The Fujinon 65mm is an astonishing lens on the 6x9 format, correctly exposed Velvia transparencies leap off the lightbox and it is not solely due to their sheer size.  I still have those Fuji cameras and use them regularly for personal use these days. 

 

A few years ago, Fujifilm UK gave me a GFW670 to use on extended loan.  Eventually I had to return it and was very tempted to buy one, the transparencies I made with it are equally as good as those I made with my Mamiya 7(ii),  it is an even more portable camera and perfect for travel 

 

I have thousands of transparencies in my archive taken with Fuji, Zeiss, Schneider and Mamiya lenses.   I can't say that any one of those lenses, or lens manufacturers are 'better' than the rest.   Such statements are only of value to the person making them and are as absurd as comparing lenses to pizzas.

 

Steve - You are so funny.  Coming from someone who deliberately doesn't use the center filter on your Fuji GX617 b/c you like so much vignetting that it looks like you used a pinhole camera, I am not surprised what you are saying!