Favourite medium format?......

[chrism]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4x5.

It's around a month since I got he Crown Graphic, and after a single 25 sheet box of HP5+ I was sold on the format.

I haven't had so much fun in ages!

 

Chris

[Nick De Marco]

Wow that shaving cupboard is amazing - even more so considering your beard, Chris!

[Advertisement]

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

[adan]

OK - here's my favorite medium format. For the moment. GASselblad, a.k.a "The Swedish Instamatic."

 

Reasons?

 

- for me, MF has always meant "square." 6x6. Rectangles I can do with a Leica, or a 4x5 (thanks, Chris!). Square is what makes MF unique. Influence of Arbus, Penn, the Photo League.

- I like some variety of focal lengths, and don't find "80mm" to be that useful, myself. I've acquired "serial" GAS over the past year, trying out most of the focal lengths. But always with the idea of boiling things down to the tightest possible set, described below.

- close focusing. TLRs and RFs just quit too far from the subject in many cases - for me, today.

- Hassy negs are just a scant mm or so smaller than Rollei, Mamiya etc. So I can more easily scan for an authentic black border and the "Hassy" notches. Pure vanity, I know.

 

So there is basically a "look" I want - square, close, black-framed, wide-or-long - that the Hassy does better or more easily than anything else.

 

HOWEVER - I have the deepest respect for the Mamiya 6 and Rolleis. Especially the compact usability. Which is why I switched from a 40 Distagon to a 1956 "Super Wide". About as small and light as the Mamiya and Rolleis for "single-camera strolling." (BTW - the 38 Biogon is the only Hassy lens I have that competes with a Rollei TLR Xenotar/Planar - no question about that.)

 

What I've boiled it down to - the SW with 38mm lens, and a 500C/M with 50, 150 and 250 lenses. In the picture, the 150 is represented by the stack of lens caps - it is in hospital, recovering from an imploded shutter.

 

Just two backs - 1 per camera. I rarely carry more than 2 lenses at once. Can be the 38 + 150, or the 50 + 150, or the 50 + 250, or some other mix. I use a smallish Domke F-10 bag (same size as for my Leicas) which helps me keep things simple on any given day.

 

I use the PME-90 prism. I can work with a WL finder, but correcting compositon with the reversed image is just too slow for the kind of active people pix I pursue. And the PME-90 has the highest eyepoint (2x magnification compared to 3.5x with a WL) - easier to keep track of "the whole picture" happening at once. But extra weight.

 

(I popped the prism off for the "street-level" angle on the marchers and cathedral.)

 

The gear, and some snaps with the 150 (plus closeup lens), 50 and 250. The store-window shot is with the SW 38 as a tip of the hat to Rollei users.

.

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!

[wlaidlaw]

Andy,

 

I think MF is any camera which uses any of the 6cm wide films (120/620/616 and others long extinct). So for example at the extreme end, a DV Gilde panorama camera taking 6 x 17 cm photos is still MF and at the other end, all the cameras taking 6 x 4.5 cm are also MF. My Graflex Crown Century (the mini Graflex) takes various roll film backs from 6 x 4.5 to the one I use most, 6 x 9. However I really feel it is a shrunken LF camera rather than a true MF.

 

There is an argument to say that the 4 x 4 cameras such as my Baby Rollei and other 127 cameras are also MF. My smallest Rolleiflex which takes 8 x 11mm film could not I think, really be classed as MF - See below

 

I am still kicking myself, that I turned down a brand new, presentation boxed and unused "wide" Distagon Rolleiflex a few years ago for just €2,000 but I had just bought the M9 at the time and my photo budget was squeaking. It was one of the ones assembled post Franke and Heidecke's bankruptcy by redundant employees.

 

Wilson

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!

[philipus]

Great write-up Andy, much enjoyed.

 

I recently got David Redfern's "The unclosed eye" (which induced a sudden urge to shoot in smoky jazz clubs) and the Hasselblad Manual which includes interesting photos that help with framing square images. Now I just have to track down that camera.

 

Philip

 

 

OK - here's my favorite medium format. For the moment. GASselblad, a.k.a "The Swedish Instamatic."

 

Reasons?

 

- for me, MF has always meant "square." 6x6. Rectangles I can do with a Leica, or a 4x5 (thanks, Chris!). Square is what makes MF unique. Influence of Arbus, Penn, the Photo League.

- I like some variety of focal lengths, and don't find "80mm" to be that useful, myself. I've acquired "serial" GAS over the past year, trying out most of the focal lengths. But always with the idea of boiling things down to the tightest possible set, described below.

- close focusing. TLRs and RFs just quit too far from the subject in many cases - for me, today.

- Hassy negs are just a scant mm or so smaller than Rollei, Mamiya etc. So I can more easily scan for an authentic black border and the "Hassy" notches. Pure vanity, I know.

 

So there is basically a "look" I want - square, close, black-framed, wide-or-long - that the Hassy does better or more easily than anything else.

 

HOWEVER - I have the deepest respect for the Mamiya 6 and Rolleis. Especially the compact usability. Which is why I switched from a 40 Distagon to a 1956 "Super Wide". About as small and light as the Mamiya and Rolleis for "single-camera strolling." (BTW - the 38 Biogon is the only Hassy lens I have that competes with a Rollei TLR Xenotar/Planar - no question about that.)

 

What I've boiled it down to - the SW with 38mm lens, and a 500C/M with 50, 150 and 250 lenses. In the picture, the 150 is represented by the stack of lens caps - it is in hospital, recovering from an imploded shutter.

 

Just two backs - 1 per camera. I rarely carry more than 2 lenses at once. Can be the 38 + 150, or the 50 + 150, or the 50 + 250, or some other mix. I use a smallish Domke F-10 bag (same size as for my Leicas) which helps me keep things simple on any given day.

 

I use the PME-90 prism. I can work with a WL finder, but correcting compositon with the reversed image is just too slow for the kind of active people pix I pursue. And the PME-90 has the highest eyepoint (2x magnification compared to 3.5x with a WL) - easier to keep track of "the whole picture" happening at once. But extra weight.

 

(I popped the prism off for the "street-level" angle on the marchers and cathedral.)

 

The gear, and some snaps with the 150 (plus closeup lens), 50 and 250. The store-window shot is with the SW 38 as a tip of the hat to Rollei users.

.

[chrism]

Wow that shaving cupboard is amazing - even more so considering your beard, Chris!

 

I make my own hot process shaving soap and I have hundreds of straight razors and even wrote a book on them, but what I don't currently have are enough platelets and white cells to let a blade near me. One more cycle to go and then I shall strop a razor and enjoy a proper shave!

 

Chris

[Keith (M)]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I bought on eBay this week a Bay 1 Rolleinar 2 close-up lens for my Rolleicord Vb. It arrived today, unexpectedly early (due Monday). Obviously I had to put it to the test and the proof of the pudding etc etc... Highly delighted - I can see I am going to have fun with it!

 

Hand-held, HP5+, Rodinal 1:50.

 

 

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!

[wlaidlaw]

The set of add on lenses I have been looking for is the Bay II wide angle lens convertor for my 3.5E Planar Rolleiflex. There seem to be plenty of Bay 1 sets around but no Bay II. I was offered a Mutar tele convertor but I am much more of a wide angle user. In the end I may sell my 3.5E with the 75mm lens and get a 55mm Distagon Rolleiwide but they are "ouch" expensive. I am told that the quality of the later Angulon/Apogon lensed Rolleiwides can leave quite a lot to be desired with a noisy, stiff releasing and clunky shutter. Some are OK and some are not.

 

Wilson

[pico]

I have no pictures of my cameras. I do have just a few sample images taken with them. I scan from prints, and no longer have a scanner so..

 

One from a Plaubel Veriwide - 6x10cm equivalent view of 21mm o 35mm.

 

Another from the same camera, same 'front on assult' kind of image.

 

There are so many more unprinted. I must get back to the darkroom.

[philipus]

Well I am now awaiting delivery of a 203FE which I hope will survive the transport from Gothenburg.

 

I've been wondering - how does the old 35mm guideline of a shutter speed for 1/focal length translate to 6x6?

 

br

Philip

[adan]

Assuming you are using MF for "even better quality" - it still applies.

 

Compared to the overall picture dimensions, any camera shake will count for less, using the same focal length. I.E. an 80mm on 6x6 will have less apparent jiggles than an 80mm on 35mm, if both are printed to the same subject magnification (8x8 print vs. 7 x 10.5 print).

 

But print them to the same film magnification (a 30 x 30 print from 6x6, and a 12 x 18 from a 35mm original) - and camera shake will look identical.

 

That ignores such factors as the much larger mirror mass swinging around inside a 6x6, or the really soft release of a TLR leaf shutter, and also the larger camera mass itself, which may damp down shake a bit.

[wattsy]

how does the old 35mm guideline of a shutter speed for 1/focal length translate to 6x6?

 

The lower enlargement factor of medium format helps but it is somewhat balanced as a component in camera shake by the longer focal lengths for a given field of view (compared with 35mm). I think it ultimately depends upon both the camera (compare the mirror slap of a Pentax 67 with the little snick of the leaf shutter in one of the recent Fuji/Bessa folders) and the user's steadiness and expectations/standards.

 

(Edit: Looks like I take longer to type than Andy.)

[pico]

I've been wondering - how does the old 35mm guideline of a shutter speed for 1/focal length translate to 6x6?

 

Examining with a loupe, it is the same rule of thumb. One factor that can offset it is the lower degree of enlargement at the same viewing distance. Consider an 8x10" print from 35mm with a normal lens next to an 8x10" contact print shot with a 300mm lens.

 

In his book, Edge of Darkness by the late Barry Thornton has a great comparison of blur at shutter speeds hand-held compared to three different weight tripods. It demonstrates what should be intuitive, that long exposures hand-held get worse with longer exposures, and on a tripod exposures blur in opposite degree. Tripods exposures tend to blur until the legs' vibrations settle down. The heavier the tripod the better, of course.

 

I did not express that as well has his examples do.

 

Wow, Ian and Andy wrote before I finished editing. A most concise thread. Thanks, all.

Edited February 17, 2015 by pico

[pico]

Speaking of camera 'slap', a vote here for the Hasselblad which has a 'pre-fire' button that swings the mirror up, opens the rear magazine flaps and then you can fire the leaf shutter when you please, or even use the lens self-timer to absolutely minimize shake. I have noticed camera movement with a leaf shutter when using a stiff or short cable release.

 

If you have an iPhone, there is a somewhat useful app 'Vibration 2.2.1'.

[philipus]

Andy, Ian, Pico, thanks very much for this. I had a feeling it would be the same but I wasn't able to put it in words. Pico thanks also for the info on mirror slap (and the iPhone app). I believe the 203FE has a mirror pre-release function but I would need to use leaf shutter lenses to maximise the benefit, I guess (?)

 

I'll be shooting at this conference which is arranged by a friend of mine and am thinking of bringing the Hasselblad, provided I've had enough time to get acquainted with it. The main cameras will be an M and an EOS 1N which I know very well.

 

The Hasselblad comes with the 80/2.8 FE and I've been wondering how much longer the 150/2.8 is in practice - I've seen an F (not FE) model for a decent price.

 

I usually shoot in landscape format so that type of comparison in terms of angle of view is the most relevant to me. From this chart I understand that 150mm would be approximately like a 96mm lens on 135 film. I can relate to this - and would find f/2.8 very useful - but I am wondering if it will be long enough. I realise this depends on the venue as well. I guess the main contenders (considering weight and handholdability) would be a 180 or a 250. I've seen a 180/4 CF T* for the same as the 150/2.8 and a 250/4 Tele-Tessar F for a bit more. Do you have experiences with these three longer lenses?

 

Br

Philip

[pico]

Philip, I know nothing of the Hasselblads other than V models. I'll bet Andy can fill us in. Shooting in landscape aspect-ratios reminds me of one stunning version of a 4.5x6cm back that Hasselblad made - Vertical! No joke. I guess it was for art directors who couldn't turn a film sideways.

[250swb]

One method to overcome any slight blur from the shutter firing is to use an ND filter and lengthen the exposure so that the vibration time is insignificant in the overall exposure. It isn't perfect, and you don't always want to use an ND filter, but it works.

 

 

Steve

[erl]

Andy, Ian, Pico, thanks very much for this. I had a feeling it would be the same but I wasn't able to put it in words. Pico thanks also for the info on mirror slap (and the iPhone app). I believe the 203FE has a mirror pre-release function but I would need to use leaf shutter lenses to maximise the benefit, I guess (?)

 

I'll be shooting at this conference which is arranged by a friend of mine and am thinking of bringing the Hasselblad, provided I've had enough time to get acquainted with it. The main cameras will be an M and an EOS 1N which I know very well.

 

The Hasselblad comes with the 80/2.8 FE and I've been wondering how much longer the 150/2.8 is in practice - I've seen an F (not FE) model for a decent price.

 

I usually shoot in landscape format so that type of comparison in terms of angle of view is the most relevant to me. From this chart I understand that 150mm would be approximately like a 96mm lens on 135 film. I can relate to this - and would find f/2.8 very useful - but I am wondering if it will be long enough. I realise this depends on the venue as well. I guess the main contenders (considering weight and handholdability) would be a 180 or a 250. I've seen a 180/4 CF T* for the same as the 150/2.8 and a 250/4 Tele-Tessar F for a bit more. Do you have experiences with these three longer lenses?

 

Br

Philip

Philip,

The 203FE is indeed a fabulous camera and there are various ways to assure steady pics, which have already been mentioned.

 

Re taking it to the conference you mentioned, I would counsel you not to! Already you are taking a Nikon and Leica M. My (lifelong) experience with such events, which I mainly covered with Hasselblads of all vintage, but for the final 20? years with the 203FE taught me one thing if nothing else. Modern digital camera, in my case M8 & M9 'shoot the pants' off the Hasselblad for this particular style of assignment. I don't just mean quality wise because that can be debated. I am referring to the overall assignment involvement. Things like , camera noise near delegates. Use of long fast lenses to keep you mildly separated from being obtrusive, and other things that I seem to have forgotten.

 

IMO, Your M should do the whole job single handed, provided you have a good lens array. You will work much faster, your digital images will work better for your client than fast film for your clients needs (I suspect). I am assuming the lighting will not be optimal , it never is, so this will work against the Blad as well, unless you plan on using flash, usually not a good look for what I imagine you will be shooting.

 

All that aside, the 203FE will please you no end for what it is good at. For that assignment I hazard a guess that you would need a 150mm and 250mm. I have shot many confrerences, orchestras, dramas with them, but in those days I able to set up studio flash units in balconies and trigger them remotely from the camera. Image quality was great, but these days flash is far less tolerated in those environments, for the better I think.

[adan]

The Hasselblad comes with the 80/2.8 FE and I've been wondering how much longer the 150/2.8 is in practice - I've seen an F (not FE) model for a decent price.

 

Hmmm - how much longer physically, or longer in reach? I guess it doesn't matter since the answer comes out "not quite twice as long" in either case. On 6x6 the 150 is about an 85 equivalent - on 645 a bit longer (96 sounds about right).

 

The 180 f/4 is supposed to be one of the three highest-performing lenses for the Hassy, along with the 100mm Planar and 60mm Distagon. But I'm working happily with the 150 and 250 instead.

 

I generally agree with erl - unless you have a specific reason to use the Hasselblad at the conference, like a consistent 6x6/645 portrait series or something, I think too many systems, at a single shoot, just get in the way of photography, exponentially with the number of pieces and different ergonomics.

 

Trying to swap from reversed WL 6x6 viewing to M window viewing to Canon AF viewing just fries my brain. I can work in fast-moving settings with the Hasselblad - so long as it is the only camera I'm carrying, so I can get into its rhythm of holding, framing, winding - and stay there. Not to mention the weight.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[erl]

A further note about rapid work with a Hassy, which is doable BTW.

 

IMO a 45 Deg finder and winder on the the 203FE really makes it a fast tool handheld, but it is still very noisy by today's standards.