Some Med.Format advice . . .

[j.lukow]

I'm thinking more and more about it. . . to get a Medium Format camera. I am even hopefully trying to plan it out This may just be GAS pains, or withdrawal

Here is what's running through my mind . . .
*The TLR's seem popular and can be reasonably priced - YashicaMats seem popular with our crowd. These have there limits though. . .
*Many SLR's are pricey, but give options of lenses and the ability to go either waist level or "prism" . . .
* If I'm just trying the format out could a folder be an option?

Now considering my "camera preferences", I think more strongly about an SLR . . .
So has anyone had any experience with Kiev 6's, they seem to be decently priced, take Pentacon lenses, and often com with TTL prism?

Are there any other brands/options I'm ignoring? I don't think I'm interested in the "TOY" cameras. Any brand I should ignore?

A somewhat confused
Jim

[Laurence]

[Orio]

[glockman99]

The old Pentax SLR 6X7 is an excellent "large format film" camera, but they can be alittle expensive.

[Attila]

I think all depend what is main goal with this camera.

I use only for landscapes, Yashica Mat 124G,
P6+CZJ Flektogon 50
Bessa Folder any of them a good option.

Certainly if you have more money any other medium format camera can be a good option.

[j.lukow]

@ Larry & Attila - Yes I realize that this is an area of preference for each person and can best be defined with the question what use are you going to put it to . . .

I'm leaning more and more toward an "SLR" with hopefully both waist level and prism. As I think about it,I realize that this leap of faith (in my abilities ) has to be done right, and I want a camera with some flexibility - I think about what Attila said he uses each for.

I definately want this one to be 120 format, this is because I have a couple sources less than an hour away, and the closer source developes Medium format film. If I take a shine to this format I may investigate B+W developing (see what I remember from 23 years ago) - since with a scanner capable of doing negs I don't need an enlarger or any of that stuff

[Laurence]

Jim, since you are sort of leaning to an SLR-type medium format camera, I would highly recommend the Pentax 645. Big thing going for the P645 is that is "user friendly" and ergonomic. Also, I feel it balances really well, and I was able to comfortably handhold some of the shots.

Of course, it is a "sort of smaller" negative/transparency, but still, when I scanned, there was SO much more real estate available than 35mm.

And, I certainly like to scan the Yashica Mat, and recently the Mamiya RB67. Frankly, I can't recognize any difference in the quality of the transparencies; the big difference is that the P645 is definitely a rectangular format, and the Yashica Mat and Mamiya are square, or nearly square.

So...I would still look at the P645 for its versatility as well. You can use many Russian and Zeiss lenses easily with the proper adapter. Specifically, the Flektogon 50 and the Vega 26B are killer lenses in my mind.

[montecarlo]

If I were you .... I would choose for beginning a TLR camera . Small (smaller that other SLR/MF cameras), would be a good beginning. Yashica made more models, not only the 124. Of course a Rolleiflex would be one of the best but other cheaper models ar ok too.

[Sevo]

[peterqd]

I remember someone telling me, when I asked a similar question, that Kiev cameras are often unreliable and prone to light leaks.

[Orio]

Pentacon 6 is a very solid camera. It can have the overlapping frame issue but careful film loading will take care of it:

http://www.pentaconsix.com/Loading.htm

Also finding spare parts will be easy because there are many P6 out there (surely more than Kievs).
Finally, I don't know about technicians in your area, but here, generic camera repairers are familiar with the P6, much less instead with the Kievs.

So if you want to go the reflex road, the P6 is the best budget option. And it has a very good and abundant choice of used lenses.

Of course, if money is no issue, then I could advice for the Contax 645...

[trifox]

Hi there --- this is a quite expensive option .. but

I have been shooting with Hasselblad 500 C -- (which is the most affordable version of Hassy) -- for 1 month ..

I have done 6 rolls --- 4 rolls with aperture and time speed recorded and lens info as well quite difficult but helpful in the future

1.set Planar 2.8/80 which is basic lens for Hassy --- many people say boring lens but it's perfect because of the CARL ZEISS quality --
so Hassy can say BIG thanks to CARL ZEISS

2.set with the Sonnar 4/150 which is not expensive but is CZ again..

I had been waiting for results of Velvia and Provia 2 rolls for a week (5 days)-- when I saw the results at a glance --- no comment )

Nothing special is on these pictures -- it's a trial set -- nothing exceptional --
but before I go sleep I have a look at them -- and talking to myself -- it was a good choice I have done -- the quality is amazing

I know that there is a next step which should be done too -- scanning ...

So I have not got scanner yet but it will be soon...

tf

[Laurence]

Jim: Did you say you have a scanner already? My memory is shot.

xoxo

[j.lukow]

@Larry

[j.lukow]

I took a shot at a P6 w/lens but lost out.
I guess thats the way with eBay

Play the game, win some lose some.

@Larry -
You have a Mamiya 67, I realize its 6x7, but what mount are the lenses?
I've noticed a decent one complete

Jim

[Henry Fisher]

Greetings, Forum.

I am resonating with trifox in this.

For more than a decade, when I was into studio work, I shot with a Hasselblad 500c and to a lesser extent with an ELM. I also had a Mamiya RB67 in the studio. And some Nikon SLRs too.

I kept the Nikons and still use them. Great 35s they are.

The Mamiya RB67 took splendid images. But it is a huge and bulky camera for the format. It stayed on my studio's roll-about Bogen tripod most of the time. That is where it belonged, IMO.

The Hasselblad 500c is the only camera I ever sold which I wish I had kept. It is just so sensible. I used it with the 80 and 150. Lately I noticed that used ones are showing up on KEH for reasonable prices.

I did not find the flip-up finder to be a problem. The reversed image is not either, after one gets used to it. The mirror staying up annoyed me at first, but I quickly got over it. The ELM I used had the 45 degree finder. I found that camera too bulky. The 500c is a camera which one can both hold and shoot from the left hand only, if necessary. I really liked it.

I studied the Kiev USA products several years ago. I never could quite make the move in that direction. Flocking issues. Film spacing issues. Light leak problems. Mechanical surprises. If I bought one of those, I would make a point of buying from a dealer who would stand behind it and make it right when the surprises show up. Frankly, I would much rather have a used Hasselblad and a couple of good Zeiss optics. The optics have leaf shutters in them too. They sync at all speeds. Better for light balancing.

Another feature I liked about the 500c is actually a feature of the Compur shutters on the lenses. When one sets a shutter speed and aperture combination, they latch together. All the equal EV combinations are thereby aligned and locked together too. So one simple movement of the shutter speed ring thereafter automatically selects the proper aperture to go with the newly selected shutter speed. This is a feature I missed after selling the camera, but I understand that it is accomplished electronically now in some newer cameras.

If I were to get back into 6cm photography I would without hesitation buy back into Hasselblad 500c. Now may be a good time, what with the rush to the digital high ground and all.

Happy day.

[Henry Fisher]

Another thought:

Some years after selling the 500c, I bought a Yashica Mat 124 to recover my lost 6cm capability.

It's a good camera costing not much money. The "Tessar-like" f/3.5 lens is very contrasty. And it was sharp if stopped down to f/5.6 or more. The soft edges were noticeable wide open. Sometimes that was okay, as with people images. At other times, one would want to stop down to get the corner sharpness back up. The on-board meter always seemed to me to be "right on." The 124 made images that would "blow away" those I made with 35mm when enlarged. I put an external spring on the sync lever so that it would not accidentally get knocked away from X sync.

But the 124 was just awkward in use. It just did not feel right in my hands. I was always reminded of how correct the Hasselblad felt in use. The 124 viewfinder had more flare than the 500c. With the 124 the top is not completely "sealed." The Hasselblad's finder masks out everything except the magnifier lens itself. So the screen is much more contrasty. I sold the 124. And unlike my experience in selling the 500c, I have not regretted selling the 124.

It was not a bad camera. It did everything it was supposed to do. It just was not for me.

[j.lukow]

In regards to those giving advice in the area of a Medium Format camera . . .
Orio won out.

I was doing the eBay cruise and spotted this with buy it now . . .
Click here to see on Ebay

So I did. There is something that resonates with the older german cameras - a site said you like them or you don't.
The lens is only single coated but since its a CZJ biometar - I think its a risk worth taking. On top of this the seller is 100% and it comes CLA'ed, so I think its a decent price.

Jim

[Attila]

Your Biometar lens is the rarest finish and even more rare export version! Congrats! Your camera body was free

[j.lukow]

And I thought I was buying a camera.



If I like its performance then I'll consider myself even luckier . . .but don't tell me when it says CZJ there's no luck involved

Thanks for the info.

Jim