Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: jimgolden on May 22, 2010, 10:36:40 pm
-
looking for a small MF film camera w/ TTL focusing - been using rangefinder which is nice and compact (Fuji GA645zi) but sick of the OOF frames and not being able to "see" the focusing. looking for something of reasonable size with a normal lens (50mm in 135 format) thoughts? thx...
-
(http://www.photographyblog.com/images/sized/images/uploads/Rolleiflex_TLR_camera-296x400.jpg)
-
I love that camera and it's a 6x6.
-
Hello,
I’ve had both the Rolleiflex and Yashica 124G cameras and the Yashica has far superior optics.
Cheers
Simon
-
Still have a Yashica Mat 124G. Still use it (occasionally). Still love it.
Mike.
-
Hello,
I’ve had both the Rolleiflex and Yashica 124G cameras and the Yashica has far superior optics.
Cheers
Simon
+1
And it's a hell of a lot cheaper.
-
Take a look at this:
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/fourcameras.html (http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/fourcameras.html)
-
edit: sorry I thought you meant manual focus, not medium format.
-
I used a Mamiya C330 in college. Not exactly what I'd call TTL because it's twin lens, but better than Rangefinder, I agree, for focus. Razor sharp lenses, but dark viewfinder. Reflex viewer available. Built like tank; when it finally dies, you can use it to drive 16-penny nails, so your investment is assured. None of these cameras is really compact, though. I assume you looked at Mamiya 7II; very compact, but yes, it's a rangefinder.
-
looking for a small MF film camera w/ TTL focusing - been using rangefinder which is nice and compact (Fuji GA645zi) but sick of the OOF frames and not being able to "see" the focusing. looking for something of reasonable size with a normal lens (50mm in 135 format) thoughts? thx...
Jim,
You did not mention your budget. On expensive side is Hasselblad, while if seeking lower priced perhaps search Ebay for "645 camera", e.g. Mamiya Pro TL --- http://mamiya.co.uk/products.php?id=13&body=true (http://mamiya.co.uk/products.php?id=13&body=true). If the Mamiya, check out the Mamiya 80mm f 1.9 lens for shallow DOF and for better low light, else the more compact 80mm f 2.8
For top image quality and large films size in portable I would recommend another rangefinder: Mamiya 7 with an 80mm lens.
Regards
Anders
-
Take a look at this: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/fourcameras.html (http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/test/fourcameras.html)
Wow -- that was step back in time. The kind of testing I'd do in the 1980's. All that effort, and then you realize that the detail of the screw is damn near exactly same in all four cameras, and that there's not a nickel's worth of real difference between any of the cameras, once the image hits the paper.
Same thing applies with much of this digital domain as well. Just pick the camera that feels good in your hand, and go shoot.
-
Wow -- that was step back in time. The kind of testing I'd do in the 1980's. All that effort, and then you realize that the detail of the screw is damn near exactly same in all four cameras, and that there's not a nickel's worth of real difference between any of the cameras, once the image hits the paper.
Same thing applies with much of this digital domain as well. Just pick the camera that feels good in your hand, and go shoot.
agreed - I love the fuji, the AF is killing me tho. Thought about the new Fuji Retro Folder 670 as well. I hadn't thought of TLRs. I've owned a M6mf and my assistant has a M7-2, again rangefinder. The Mam645 didnt come into thought as I own an H3D and film backs, was looking for something smaller than that. Pentax67 is huge no? that crossed my mind...
thx for all the input, thought I might be missing something and I was - TLRs
jim
PS this has all stemmed from seeing some contacts a few months ago, after shooting digital exclusive for almost 8yrs, falling in love with film again, amazing and fun journey that's revitalizing my love for photography (thats sometimes bled dry by my commercial business)
-
My vote goes for the Mamiya TLRs. I chose one over Rolleiflex since you can change lenses. Opted for C220 due to it being lighter and the C330 doesn't have any features I miss.
I have a 70cmx70cm print on my wall from a scanned Provia slide, and it is tack sharp - truly amazing piece of equipment.
-
Agfa Super Isolette (6x6) if you can find a good clean copy (or the Ansco Super Speedex which is the same camera made by Agfa for Ansco). The camera folds very flat and the Solinor lens is quite sharp even by modern standards. It's not as punchy in colors as modern multi-coated lenses but very acceptable and colors are easily enhanced in post processing (or by choosing one of the high saturation films). I have tried several portable MF cameras and this is easily the most portable.
-
I used a Mamiya C330 in college. Not exactly what I'd call TTL because it's twin lens, but better than Rangefinder, I agree, for focus. Razor sharp lenses, but dark viewfinder. Reflex viewer available. Built like tank; when it finally dies, you can use it to drive 16-penny nails, so your investment is assured. None of these cameras is really compact, though. I assume you looked at Mamiya 7II; very compact, but yes, it's a rangefinder.
I had a C330 (TLR) and I was very glad to give it up an change to a Hasselblad... I particularly disliked it with colour film,, but I had three lenses for it, and I expect you can pick them up for peanuts.
If you want a good tele, get the Telle-rollei TLR.
-
Pentacon Six TL with an 80mm MC Biometar - really tiny and light for a 6x6 SLR. Shaped like a 35mm SLR and scarcely any bigger.
The 120mm MC Biometar is an even better lens; great short tele for portraits.
The Pentax 645 is also very compact...and has a lot of the automation that your Fuji compact has.
-
I had a C330 (TLR) and I was very glad to give it up an change to a Hasselblad... I particularly disliked it with colour film,, bur I had three lenses for it, and I expect you can pick them up for peanuts.
If you wan a good tele, get the Telle-rollei TLR.
Close to my experience: had a Rollei T (75mm) and bought the C330 for the 180mm to do heads. As soon as I could afford to I sold the T for the 500C and then later, when I could finance the 150mm Sonnar I got rid of the Mamiya. Unfortunately, I hadn't realised how much mirror bounce the 500C had and it shocked me first time out doing hand-held fashion...
On the other hand, the 180mm on Mami had a nicer effect and could get closer without distorting than the 150mm on 'blad. The 180mm for 'blad didn't exist at the time. However, the parallax problem with the 180mm on the Mami was awfully awkward to deal with, even though it was a tripod situation every time.
Yes, glad to have left it and wish I had NOT abandoned the 500 Series many years later.
Rob C
-
Pentacon Six TL with an 80mm MC Biometar - really tiny and light for a 6x6 SLR. Shaped like a 35mm SLR and scarcely any bigger.
The 120mm MC Biometar is an even better lens; great short tele for portraits.
The Pentax 645 is also very compact...and has a lot of the automation that your Fuji compact has.
interesting, I'll check these out too
thx everyone
-
Close to my experience: had a Rollei T (75mm) and bought the C330 for the 180mm to do heads. As soon as I could afford to I sold the T for the 500C and then later, when I could finance the 150mm Sonnar I got rid of the Mamiya. Unfortunately, I hadn't realised how much mirror bounce the 500C had and it shocked me first time out doing hand-held fashion...
On the other hand, the 180mm on Mami had a nicer effect and could get closer without distorting than the 150mm on 'blad. The 180mm for 'blad didn't exist at the time. However, the parallax problem with the 180mm on the Mami was awfully awkward to deal with, even though it was a tripod situation every time.
Yes, glad to have left it and wish I had NOT abandoned the 500 Series many years later.
Rob C
I still have a hand-powered 500, the ELD and the Flexbody, an 40mm 80mm 120macro and 250. I should, perhaps have made do with a CFV39 and not bought the H3>4. I am thinking I will buy a 39 as a back-up system when or if I can afford it.
I thought that the 120 was long enough for most portraiture, and did not use the 250 very much.
-
Bronica's RF645 "Texas Leica" should be a pretty good choice too, if you can deal with the vertical framing. I have the 45mm f/4 and the 65mm f/4. There was also a 135mm in early versions, which was later revised to a 100mm due to lack of sufficient rangefinder baseline to accurately focus the 135mm. It has a really nice feel to it, metal and solid.
Tamron's Bronica RF645 Page (http://www.tamron.com/bronica/prod/rf645.asp)
-
Bronica's RF645 "Texas Leica" should be a pretty good choice too, if you can deal with the vertical framing. I have the 45mm f/4 and the 65mm f/4. There was also a 135mm in early versions, which was later revised to a 100mm due to lack of sufficient rangefinder baseline to accurately focus the 135mm. It has a really nice feel to it, metal and solid.
Tamron's Bronica RF645 Page (http://www.tamron.com/bronica/prod/rf645.asp)
Great camera except it's not TTL focusing, which was his main requirement...
-
Think ahead and start a system for which you can later get additional lenses...and a digital back.
-
Jim,
if you're only looking to shoot film with this camera, then I'd look at the Pentax 645's. The N/NII have AF, they're small(ish), a nice motor drive for a MF camera(about 2fps), and the lenses are terrific!
I'm in the process of picking up a 645n with the 45mm and 75mm lenses from a friend, he's used them for years, and they're still kicking ass !
take a look(and a feel if you can). they're great little cameras.
the only drawback IMO is that they don't have interchangeable magazines, like the Mamiya 645 tl(or pro), but generally this doesn't really matter much.
cheers!
-Dan
-
Bronica's RF645 "Texas Leica" should be a pretty good choice too, if you can deal with the vertical framing. I have the 45mm f/4 and the 65mm f/4. There was also a 135mm in early versions, which was later revised to a 100mm due to lack of sufficient rangefinder baseline to accurately focus the 135mm. It has a really nice feel to it, metal and solid.
Tamron's Bronica RF645 Page (http://www.tamron.com/bronica/prod/rf645.asp)
texas leica are the fuji 680, 690...
no TTL focusing...
-
Think ahead and start a system for which you can later get additional lenses...and a digital back.
dick, read the posts, I have an H3D, a 5D2, a sinar, blah blah blah : )
I'm going BACK to film for my personal work...
-
I'd look at the Pentax 645's. The N/NII have AF, they're small(ish),
daniel how does the pentax compare in size to an H hassie with a filmback and 80mm?
-
texas leica are the fuji 680, 690...
no TTL focusing...
The Fuji 680 is TTL focusing, for sure. You must be thinking of the 670 and 690. The 680 is the Texas Deardorff; not quite what I'd classify as "compact", unless you're traveling in a Texas Hummer.
-
dick, read the posts, I have an H3D, a 5D2, a sinar, blah blah blah : )
I'm going BACK to film for my personal work...
A Hasselblad V system would still be a viable option, if compact enough for your purposes.
-
The Fuji 680 is TTL focusing, for sure. You must be thinking of the 670 and 690. The 680 is the Texas Deardorff; not quite what I'd classify as "compact", unless you're traveling in a Texas Hummer.
excuse me, texas leica is Fuji RANGEFINDER GS or GW or whatevs 670, 690 - or at least thats what ive been told, read, etc...
I know what a gx680 is.
splitting hairs here...
-
Cheap, light, compact, well-built: Rolleicord V. That's the camera I take with me when I travel, or my Bronica RF645.
-
daniel how does the pentax compare in size to an H hassie with a filmback and 80mm?
Jim,
the Pentax 645 is a great little camera. Compared to the H(1 or 2), I owned an H2 , and it was a beast weight-wise. If I were walking around, or even just taking photos of the family around the house(which I do since I'm still at home w/ the family while in school, I'm 22 btw).
you know what the H is like weight-wise, so you know its not too light. But think of something around 1/2-2/3 the weight of the H, with a faster motordrive(IMO, haven't checked specs) and a nice "in the hand" feel. Not too small(and I have bigger hands than most normal people), but just big enough. The viewfinder is quite nice, a little "tubey", but still very nice(IMO).
the AF is pretty damn accurate too.
here's a little write-up from our best friend, Ken Rockwell
the lenses these days are going for pennies on the dollar, check KEH prices, but I've really been considering just dumping my Nikon 35mm system(film) and just going with a 645n, the one from my friend I mentioned before.
a bigger negative, a fast enough motordrive for most things, and it ain't too expensive, you can always have an extra backup body, or 2, or 3
the lenses are all great too. I've made 16x20's from some studio shots I did for a college class, and everyone was wondering if I had shot 4X5 for it(since I'd shot 4x5 for pretty much everything else that semester) "nope, that shitty-looking man. focus bastardized Pentax that no one wants to check out from the stockroom". I've had a hard time checking it out since
oh... and I shot the series on 400Tmax. that film just rocks!!! soup it in pretty much anything(I use pyro), and the results can mimic anything, that classic "tri-x" look(I've found if used with Rodinal), or Panatomic-X(if dev'd in the Tmax developer, which is designed for super-fine grain, a little less sharp, but really nice overall).
I've found the 75mm 2.8 lens to be a great performer, everyone seems to thing that you need to have some sort of "special" whiz-bang lens for shooting portraits, or for "creamy bokeh". I seem to use that P.O.S. lens(heck it was a rental camera b4 being donated to the school) about 80% of the time, with the remainder split between the 45mm and the 120mm.
to be quite honest, I've come to love this camera so much, my RZ's getting withdrawal symptoms ! It's like shooting a 35mm on steroids. Light and fast, and gives you a nice big negative(not like a 6x7 mind you ), but still damn good enough to make 16x20's that knock people's socks off(at least in my experience )
cheers!
-Dan
-
I used to own a Pentax 645N and a Mamiya 7II at the same time, around 1998-ish.
They are both beautiful cameras, I loved them both. The 645N was fun and easy to use, especuially with the wider zoom. Well designed, well constructed, a very solid feel. I think I used the 645N almost exclusively for about 1 year.
But for me at the time, the 645 negative was just a little too small. It wasn't high enough quality (again - to me) to justify the extra expense and inconvienence over 35mm. After that year, I wound up using the Mamiya 7II almost exclusively when I didn't need an SLR, rather than the 645N, because of image area.
That said, a color 6x7 slide/negative was a bit pricy, at about $1 per frame (for pro color film and pro lab development, here in the US.) With slide film in particular, doing 1 or 2 variations of an image with 1 or 2 brackets to avoid blowing hightlights, etc, meant that you might shoot a roll of 220 - 20 images, 20 dollars - on maybe two scenes. By comparison, the 33 (I thnk?) frames on a 220 roll from the Pentax, with its very accurate matrix metering, felt quite liberating. (The metering on the Mamiya 7 is a bot unique, to say teh least. Once you get used to it though it is fine.)
In the end, though, I really do **like** to make images. I like the whole process of exploration in the field, moving into and around a subject, experimenting, and I didn't want to severly restrict the number of frames that I made, especially for personal projects. So the price really got to be prohibitive for me, something like $5,000 per year just for film and developing for personal stuff. That is the quandry still every time I pick up one of my film cameras, which are mostly 4x5 nowadays.
Anyway, have fun! Lots of nice choices.
Best,
Michael
-
thx for input Dan and Michael
-
My sexiest camera taken by my ugliest camera
(http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/3520/pic1wy.th.jpg) (http://img534.imageshack.us/i/pic1wy.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
-
Makina 67. It folds has modern optics and gives you a 6x7. You have a choice of either a wide or slightly wide camera. RF and built in meter, Plaubel will still service and repair them. I had one for years until I dropped it recently.
Kevin.
-
...In the end, though, I really do **like** to make images. I like the whole process of exploration in the field, moving into and around a subject, experimenting, and I didn't want to severly restrict the number of frames that I made, especially for personal projects. So the price really got to be prohibitive for me, something like $5,000 per year just for film and developing for personal stuff. That is the quandry still every time I pick up one of my film cameras, which are mostly 4x5 nowadays. ...
Anyway, have fun! Lots of nice choices.
Best,
Michael
Very much agreed.
I shoot my personal project work on 54 (or 4x5 if you prefer!). I use it due to the large image size and the movements to get the imaeg quality I want...but it can be restricitve in terms of amounts of shot you shoot, variations, etc.
I often find myself scouting the location with my G11, then sitting back and looking over the shots, then selecting the one to shoot properly.
Without doubt in film the most flexible camera I ever used is the Mamiya 7. Top IQ, handholdable, flexible, 10 versions for the same price as one sheet of 54, etc etc.
I love film and love working with my 54, but won't be too sad when the day comes that I put a digital back on my large format (or other shift) camera.
Marc
-
Makina 67. It folds has modern optics and gives you a 6x7. You have a choice of either a wide or slightly wide camera. RF and built in meter, Plaubel will still service and repair them. I had one for years until I dropped it recently.
Kevin.
Sigh. Again:
Great camera except it's not TTL focusing, which was his main requirement...
[I'm sounding like a broken record here...why don't people read the posts before jumping in with a reply?]
-
Sigh. Again:
Great camera except it's not TTL focusing, which was his main requirement...
[I'm sounding like a broken record here...why don't people read the posts before jumping in with a reply?]
My choice was a new Rolleiflex 2.8 FX - bought it over the auction site, from a guy in Shanghai who probably purchased the inventory of Francke & Heidecke from the receivers... I thought it was the end of an era, always wanted to have this camera (I started with photography with a TLR given to me at the age of 11 by my grandfather, it was a TLR - a Flexaret VI , so this was going back to the roots for me. I do not regret my choice - even though I use an MFDB these days almost all the time, sometimes, especially when I want to travel light (usually on business), I take the Rollei. Last time was on a business trip to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (see below). And sorry for not thinking before jumping in with a reply. Regards, Martin
[attachment=22575:Jeddah_Al_Balad.jpg]
-
Sigh. Again:
Great camera except it's not TTL focusing, which was his main requirement...
[I'm sounding like a broken record here...why don't people read the posts before jumping in with a reply?]
Isn't it entirely possible that myself and others who did not post TTL focusing suggestions have looked at what he was using before, and thought about what he wanted to do, and... putting ourselves in his shoes, suggest camera models that we genuinely feel are worth considering given what it seems like he is looking for? Of course no camera fulfills all the requirements, I don't believe there has ever been one that does. Is that all wrong?
Or maybe everybody is purposely posting non-TTL suggestions just so you can jump in and set us all straight!
-
i settled on Pentax 645N - on its way to me now, we'll see ho it goes...$525, cant beat that
-
hey Jim,
great to hear! $525 for a 645N ain't a bad price either.
enjoy it!
-Dan
-
Isn't it entirely possible that myself and others who did not post TTL focusing suggestions have looked at what he was using before, and thought about what he wanted to do, and... putting ourselves in his shoes, suggest camera models that we genuinely feel are worth considering given what it seems like he is looking for? Of course no camera fulfills all the requirements, I don't believe there has ever been one that does. Is that all wrong?
No, it's not wrong...it's just...odd, given the very tight parameters that Jim set. Here's his question again, entire and verbatim:
looking for a small MF film camera w/ TTL focusing - been using rangefinder which is nice and compact (Fuji GA645zi) but sick of the OOF frames and not being able to "see" the focusing. looking for something of reasonable size with a normal lens (50mm in 135 format) thoughts? thx...
When someone says that they are sick of something, that's a pretty strong indicator that they want no more of it. Is it any wonder that I concluded some respondents hadn't properly read his post?
Or maybe everybody is purposely posting non-TTL suggestions just so you can jump in and set us all straight!
I think we're all too busy for that!
-
i've owned a lot of MF rangefinders over the years...I love the Plaubel most of all possibly