Related Local Links:
Advice to Buyers of Older Medium Format Cameras
Bronica 6x6 Home Page
Danny Gonzalez's Medium Format Camera Reviews
Finding Great Values in Medium Format Cameras [3/2001]
History of Medium Format SLR
Med Fmt Camera Features and Selection Guide
Peter Williams on MF Camera Choices

Related Links:
Kodak 620 Special (Chris Perez, low $$, hi resolution)

No. You can buy a surprising range of medium format equipment on almost any budget. Granted, most current medium format cameras are rather expensive, but there are exceptions such as the Kiev 88 SLR, the Chinese Seagull and Lubitel TLRs, and even point and shoot toy MF cameras! You also have a huge range of used medium format cameras to pick from, ranging from classic collectible folder cameras to the latest model systems used by professional photographers and serious amateur medium format photographers too.

Heck no. Your 35mm SLR camera is able to do many things that are difficult or impossible to do with most medium format cameras. Many 35mm lenses have few or no equal in medium format, especially on a budget, such as circular fisheyes, long telephotos, and many zooms.

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!

Q. What are the best buys on a budget in current medium format cameras?

Depending on your budget, your choices for new camera models are somewhat limited:

The big news in budget MF is the new Mamiya 645E, an interchangeable lens 6x4.5cm auto-metering SLR made in China but bearing a retail price tag of $750 US. The finder is fixed and interchangeable inserts are used rather than removable backs. But the kit mounts the various mamiya 645 optics, which are relative bargains on used gear markets.

For under $1,000 US, you might consider various models of the Kiev 88 from post-Soviet sources. The Kiev 88 current lenses are also relatively inexpensive as MF lenses go. The Kiev 88 is both 6x6cm and 6x4.5cm formats, using a replaceable back camera that looks like a Hasselblad.

For under $350 US, you might look at the Kiev 60 MF SLRs (FAQ) and equally inexpensive Kiev 60 current lenses. The Kiev 60 is similar in shape to a large 35mm camera but does 6x6cm format only.

For under $100 US, you would be limited to either the Lubitel 166 TLR ($60 US) or the Chinese Seagull TLRs (previously only $80 US at Porter's Camera in 1998/9, now over $200-300!). The Lubitel 166 TLR does both 6x6cm and 6x4.5cm formats. With the Seagull TLRs, try to get a four element lens version (4A-1) over lesser quality three element ones (4A-103 and 4B). In the USA, new importers have heavily advertised new Seagull TLRs, but raised the prices to over $200 (in mid-2002). I recommend a used Rolleicord, Autocord, Yashicamat or other used TLR for circa $100 as a better buy.

Polaroid cameras are often forgotten, but they are also medium format. Some models can produce B&W negatives using p/n film types up to 4x5 inches in size for darkroom work. Despite Polaroid's bankruptcy (mid 2002), we can expect some Polaroid style films will still be available from Fuji in the future.

For under $20 US, you can get a toy camera such as the Holga 120s (a 6x4.5cm 120 rollfilm) or a clone of the toy 120 Diana in 6x6cm format.

Medium format used gear prices have dropped on the low and mid range pro gear by up to 50% since the digital camera craze and economic downturn of early 2000 A.D. So this is a great time to be buying used medium format gear, as prices have seldom been lower.

As noted above, the Mamiya 645E (E for economy) has shocked the MF new gear buyers with an under $750 MF 6x4.5cm SLR with metering finder and auto-modes. Wow! This entry level camera puts tremendous price pressures on used and unwarranteed MF gear. How can dealers reasonably expect to get $595 US$ for a used 25 year old Bronica S2A kit, when $750 will buy them a brand new in warranty auto-metering Mamiya 645E SLR? See the problem?

Much of the used MF gear is not the latest top of the line pro items, but rather the "backup" lenses and bodies. For example, a number of older Hasselblad C lenses, which are now orphaned for certain repair parts, are being sold at prices as low as $400-$500 US$. The same lenses in the late 1990s would have cost over $1,000 US$. Fortunately, many of these used older optics and bodies are precisely what entry level buyers are looking for!

Dealers are getting out of used gear sales, with some major players (like Wall Street Camera) exiting the business entirely. Ebay provided a means to dump a lot of marginal stock at low advertising cost. Medium format sales are off up to 50% in the USA and Japan (see photoindustry statistics). Yikes! Hasselblad USA sold lots of demo gear to generate cash (shortly before the sale of Hasselblad to Shriro of Hong Kong in 2003). In other words, we are seeing a lot of one time sell-offs of dealer stock and demo gear, further depressing prices.

Only you can decide whether you would rather buy a new MF camera in warranty, such as the Mamiya 645E for under $750 US$ or buy a used camera kit at today's equally depressed used gear prices. The market is changing rapidly, and an industry shakeout may be underway too. But chances are good that you will get a bargain in MF gear at today's depressed new and used gear prices. So enjoy!!

See Jeff Albro's IMPACT Used Photo Gear Pages for links to new and used gear dealers online, and photo classified ads by individuals. Auctions such as EBAY may offer hard to find accessories and cameras too, but be careful in your bidding! We also have a page on buying grey market overseas cameras that might save you a great deal on a new system! [added 5/2/99]

Don't forget to check out the rec.photo USENET newsgroups, which have a number of rec.photo.marketplace groups (such as r.p.m.medium-format, r.p.m.35mm etc.). You will often find odd items from other amateur photographers, often at decent prices. Photonet also has a popular set of listings for individuals selling or buying gear. You can also place free wanted to buy ads on both these areas, possibly leading to tips or offers to sell you the wanted item cheaply!

Q. How does the quality of these current budget MF SLR cameras compare to current Swedish, German, or Japanese MF cameras like Hasselblad, Rollei, Pentax, Mamiya, or Bronica?

You can't expect to get the same quality in a $550 US Kiev 88 as in a new Rollei SLR, the most expensive SLR ever made according to the Rollei ads. The Kiev lenses have good reputations, and are generally held to be very good value for the money. The Kiev bodies can be good workhorses, if you get a good one. You will also see a number of laments from users with various Kiev body related problems on USENET. But while vocal, they are clearly the minority of users. Still, I would urge caution in buying a used Kiev body, get a warranty period, and check out our companion article on Camera and Lens Testing for Buyers. Check out Edward Lau's Kiev-88 buying guide for more tips and suggestions. Both Shutterbug and Popular Photography have had reviews of the Kiev medium format options with generally positive reviews. See also Sam Sherman's comparison of Kiev-88 versus Bronica S2/S2A too.

While you can save by buying a grey market, non-US warrantied camera, I would recommend against it. Kiev USA reportedly does additional quality checking and provides warranty support that you might find valuable. The Kiev-60 cameras seem to have fewer repair problems. The Kiev-88 post-cold war cameras are better and have better body flare control than the Soviet era models. Similarly, the latest lenses have multi-coating, but at a 50%+ increase in price.

Even if you don't buy a Kiev body, you might find their inexpensive lenses useful as they reportedly fit the older Hasselblad 1000f (Kiev 88) and Pentacon 6 (Kiev 60) mounts in some models (with minor thread machining required according to some posters). The Kiev Zodiak 30mm lens is unique in being an inexpensive fisheye in 6x6 format. An Kiev lens mount adapter for Mamiya 645 and Pentax 645 focal plane cameras may be worth checking out too ($30 up).

Q. How about the quality of those low-cost Chinese and Post-Soviet Ukraine camera models (TLRs, folders,...)?

The Chinese TLRs have reputations for highly variable quality, often bad, and the three element lens optics leave much to be desired. The better four element optics of the later SeaGull 4A-1 are harder to find. Porter's Camera Store was clearing out their Seagull TLR stock in late 1997, so it isn't clear how much longer they will be in production. For more information about economy Chinese TLRs, see About $75 Chinese TLRs by John Stewart article. Bo Hultberg has also contributed some extensive Seagull notes, including the models 4A and 4B TLRs [added 8/22/99].

Bo Hultberg's Seagull User Notes provide for more details and photos of Seagull Model 4A and 4B TLRs, Seagull 203 folder, and the unusual Great Wall DF-4 6x6cm Chinese SLR! You can also find notes on an economy 35mm Eastar camera here too.

The Lubitel TLRs also have relatively poor reputations. But again, a good one can be found in light use now and then. The Lubitel optics are better than the bodies, which tend to have film transport and light leak problems. Repairs are also obviously a problem on any TLR, but especially so for a budget under $100 US model.

Poor quality control is often blamed for many problems with these cameras, and sometimes deservedly so. Yet many of the reported problems with these cameras arise from failing to read and follow the user manual cautions or mis-loading film. Still, be sure to get a return warranty and don't be put off by a glitch or two with even your new camera system buy. Given the cost, it is to be expected, and thanks to the warranty, you may soon have a surprisingly workable camera for less than some models charge for their lens caps (e.g., $300 for the plastic 40mm Superangulon Rollei lens cap!).

Q. What about the other cameras such as the Diana and Holgas and other point and shoot cameras?

The toy cameras are just that, and have as many problems and defects as you can think of, and then some! However, some folks like the challenge of getting a $15 Diana or Holga 120s (6x4.5cm) camera to work.

Q. What about polaroid cameras?

Polaroid cameras are a little appreciated medium format option.

The resulting negative is nearly 3''x4 3/8'' and can easily be enlarged 20x or even 25x with minimal grain. Best of all, you can buy polaroid cameras with electronic exposure controls that take the type 665 p/n film for well under $50 US (e.g., model 250 polaroid). These cameras are also quite small and easily carried.

The main disadvantage is the cost of the film (over a dollar a photo) and the limitation to black and white, plus the need to process the negative to preserve it. ( For more details, see MF B and W on a Budget in Shutterbug July 1990 pp. 109-10 by Jeffrey Steele.)

You can find a rather complete listing of current medium format cameras at this site, along with much related information in the Medium Format Home Page site too. Individual camera model pages and links can also provide lots of useful tips on various MF cameras available. You may find it useful to review your options by camera format sizes too. Many medium format models are panoramic or superwide cameras that are highly specialized and definitely not budget oriented models.

Q. How can I check out a used or new camera or lens before buying?

For some useful camera checks, see our camera and lens testing local article for suggestions.

The number and diversity of used medium format cameras is HUGE! But it is pretty easy to cut down the thousands of cameras into a more limited and useful group for current user cameras. In general, pre-WWII cameras are collector's items, and either in collections or in rather poor shape for use as a working camera too.

Many other cameras are so rare that you are unlikely to encounter one. Lots of MF cameras don't fit into low budget price ranges, such as the Hasselblads and Rolleis.

In short, we will try to organize your best used medium format camera buys in the sections below!

Q. What about used budget MF SLRs, starting with the earliest models?

We can start by dividing the MF SLRs into four major categories or types:

1. Hasselblad system cameras - 1600F, 1000F, 500c, Bronica S2A. Kiev 88
2. Overgrown 35mm designs - Praktisix, Exakta 88, Pentacon 6. Kiev 60, Pentax 67
3. TLR derivatives - Kalimar 660, Kaligar, Kowa 6, Kowa 66
4. Other - Optika Professional, Polaroids

From the late 1940s, we have the original Hasselblad 1600F and 1000F. The F is for focal plane shutter, while the numbers refer to the claimed (if rarely achieved) shutter speeds. These cameras may be able to share lenses with some later mounts, with some minor machining in some cases, such as the current Kiev 88 SLRs. These early Hasselblads used different backs than later 500c models as well as different lenses. Some users had trouble with the metal shutter design, for which repairs are quite costly. Today, these cameras are considered collectibles rather than user cameras, and often command prices from $750 (1000f) to over $1,500 US (1600f) - well outside a budget user price range.

The focal plane Hasselblads inspired a number of copycats, of which the classic Bronica 6x6 are the most numerous. Bronicas are also available at a surprisingly low price given their Japanese high quality optics and reasonably rugged mechanics.

The classic Bronicas featured Nikkor lenses, among many others, and have both a bayonet and 57mm screw thread lens mount. That screw thread mount makes it easy to mount lenses on these focal plane shutter camera bodies, and many early MF lens makers did so. Over 75 lenses are available in the classic Bronica 6x6 mounts. One of the lenses is a 105mm Nikkor leaf shutter design for extended flash synch needs. Many are outstanding Nikkor optics, covering 40mm to 600mm and beyond. Models are Z, D, C, P, S, S2, S2a, EC, and EC/TL.

The last all-mechanical S2a model featured a rugged and reliable mechanical design. The first auto-aperture exposure MF SLR was the Bronica EC/TL, which offers an exciting automatic MF SLR in a budget range with quality Nikkor optics. The earlier Bronica models had notable problems with lens focusing mounts and film transport wear that bears close checking.

Bronica 6x6 SLRs with Nikkor normal lens can be bought for $250 US up, with S2a systems starting at $500 US and an aperture priority or manual mode EC/TL for under $1,000 US - see (price listings site).

The Hasselblad 500c (and later 500c/m) featured an outstanding Zeiss 80mm f2.8 planar normal lens with a Compur shutter offering flash synch at all speeds from 1 second to 1/500^th second. All of its early SLR competitors (Bronica, Kalimar, Optika, Praktisix) were limited to slow (e.g., 1/30^th) flash synch due to their focal plane designs. Hasselblad Corp. marketing were first-rate too.

The later 500c/m had some modest changes, including interchangeable (by the user) matte viewscreens, and equally modest improvements in design of backs (e.g., A12 vs. early 12 back). The 500EL and later 500ELM were the first motor drive MF SLRs. The Hasselblad 500c with lens was only $615, while the 500EL was only $885 in 1965. Today, you might be lucky enough to find a 500c or 500 EL user camera for under $1,000 US.

Q. What about the cost of Hasselblad lenses and accessories?

You can use older 500c backs and lenses and many accessories on current Hasselblad bodies, and vice versa. That has meant that prices for used Hasselblad 500c items have kept pace with the rising prices of current Hasselblad cameras. In the last decade, street prices for new lenses have more than tripled, and most used lenses have kept pace.

Hasselblad USA rebate program attempted to remove many older 500c and 500c/m bodies from the market with generous trade-ins. In short, these fine MF SLR cameras are harder and harder to find at budget prices. If you do find one, have it checked out for operation and light-tightness, as a full Clean/Lubricate/Adjust by Hasselblad USA can cost $360 US and up.

Q. What about the new Kiev cameras with Hasselblad accessories compatibility? [added 8/8/99]

In late summer 1999, a series of new Kiev cameras became available from the Kiev factory. These cameras now feature Hasselblad compatible film backs and viewfinder mounts.

This Hasselblad compatibility means a low cost ($80 US) 12 exposure film back can be used on either your Kiev (Hartblei) body or on any compatible Hasselblad body (500cm/2xxx..). The 16 exposure back is only $130, or $140 for the polaroid back. Similarly, you can buy a 45 degree metering finder for around $150 US from Kalimex, or a chimney finder for $65 US.

In fact, you can buy the entire Hasselblad accessory compatible Kiev body, with a pentacon-6 or Kiev mount lens, TTL metering prism, and set of Hasselblad backs for less than the cost of a new Hasselblad TTL metering prism.

You can even buy Kiev lenses from Kiev/USA that have been remounted in Hasselblad 2xxx focal plane shutter body compatible mounts (unfortunately, manual aperture control only, not auto-diaphragm - yet). Some repairtechs are offering similar remounting services.

These low cost Hasselblad compatible accessories offers the budget MF buyer the chance to buy a low cost Kiev outfit now, but later upgrade to a Hasselblad focal plane shutter body (2xx/x series..). These f/p Hasselblad bodies can also work with leaf shutter lenses.

Conversely, you can opt for the pentacon-6 mount Kiev body(s) and invest in the older Zeiss and Schneider 6x6 lenses made for that camera mount years ago. The same Zeiss designs and quality will cost you a whole lot less than similar Zeiss lenses in a Hasselblad mount (like 80% less or more). But note that these lenses are for a focal plane camera, and lack in-the-lens leaf shutters (as do some Hasselblad focal plane camera lenses too, for economy reasons).

Even if you opt to start out with an older used Hasselblad body (e.g., 500C) and lens, the availability of these low cost Kiev Hasselblad compatible backs and viewfinders adds many options to your system at a budget price.

Q. What about the Hasselblad Superwide and SWC?

Hasselblad also put out a non-interchangeable lens non-SLR body camera called the Hasselblad Superwide and later SWC models. These cameras were designed around a unique 90 degree angle superwide Zeiss 38mm f/4.5 Biogon lens. Since the Hasselblad SLR bodies couldn't accommodate this lens design, a body was built to accommodate the lens! A top-mounted optical finder or ground glass back could be used for focusing. It is highly unlikely that you will find such cameras in a budget range (e.g., under $1,000 US), but you might get lucky!

I was fortunate to be able to buy a Hasselblad 500c for under $500 in the mid-1980s and add backs (including 6x4.5) and finders and various items. But as a graduate student, I couldn't afford to add any lenses to this system, then or now. I didn't recognize that the real cost would include the cost of the entire system, including lenses and accessories. That has led me to explore many other MF options, while still having the fun of using this fine 500c camera. I characterize this as the 80% solution and recommend it to you. But if you have incurable lens envy, then be prepared to embark on an exciting exploration of MF lens options below ;-).

Q. What about the Kowa 6 and Kowa 66 MF SLR cameras?

The Kowa 6 and Kowa 66 MF SLR cameras were often called the poor man's Hasselblad. The Kowa 6 featured high quality leaf shutter interchangeable lenses, interchangeable prisms and finders, and a polaroid back option. The Kowa 66 added easily interchanged backs to the system camera, while taking the earlier lenses. The Kowa lenses were made in Japan, but like the Bronica lenses, they were top quality and produced excellent results.

Unlike the classic 6x6 Bronicas, all the Kowa leaf shutter lenses provided for flash synchronization at all speeds (up to 1/500th), as did the contemporary Hasselblad 500c and 500cm models. Kowa prices for lenses have remained relatively stable, unlike the prices of Hasselblad lenses. As a result, you can buy a Kowa 6 for under $350 US with leaf shutter 80mm f/2.8 normal lens, add in the 55mm f/3.5 and 150mm f/3.5 lenses, and still pay less than most used Hasselblad 500c/m cameras or used Rollei SLR with just one lens (i.e., under $1,000 US).

Besides the Hasselblad 500c, the 500EL, and the Bronica series discussed above, you can also find some odd MF SLR cameras out there.

The Kalimar 660 and Kaligar SLRs were among the early focal plane SLR competitors to Hasselblad and Bronica, along with the overgrown 35mm style Praktisix and oddly shaped Optika Professional. The Fujita 66 cameras were related to the Kalimar Reflex and 660 cameras too.

You may also find some rare cameras such as the Corfield 66 and other post-WWII SLR variants. In this case, British post-WWII currency and import controls encouraged a brief flurry of MF SLR production such as the Corfield models that collapsed with the subsequent more open economy. As a result, you are unlikely to find many of these cameras or accessories such as lenses for them.

Another series of related MF SLRs are the Norita 66, Rittreck 66, and Warner 6x6 focal plane SLRs with shutter speeds to 1/500^th second that shoots both 120 and 220 film. Like the Bronicas, there was an 80mm leaf shutter lens for flash synch needs. These cameras were rugged mechanical designs with first-rate optics, but are rare and hard to find used.

Q. What about lenses for these earlier MF SLRS?

You are also unlikely to find many lenses or accessories for most of these rarer MF SLRs (vs. the longer-lived classic Bronica models). The major exceptions are the Pentacon 6/Exakta 66/Kiev 60 lenses, some of which are still being produced by Arsenal/Kalimex in Kiev, The Ukraine, at attractive prices for MF lenses. Astute collectors and users have snapped up most of the earlier Pentacon 6 lenses in this mount made by Schnieder or Carl Zeiss related factories. While more common in the European market, such lenses often command a premium price now in the USA when you can find them. Recent articles in Popular Photography singing the praises of these Pentacon-6 lenses on low-cost Kiev-60 (and certain Kiev-88 cameras with Kiev-60 lens mount) bodies hasn't helped keep the prices down either!

However, be sure to check carefully about lens compatibility, as various versions of Kiev-88 and Kiev-60 series camera bodies and lenses were not always fully compatible. Some Kiev bodies had multiple lens mount versions. So one Kiev-88 body may mount standard Kiev-88 lenses, while a second Kiev-88 body with the Pentacon-6 mount uses the same lenses as the Kiev-60. This option can be handy if you want both the Kiev-60 and Kiev-88 style cameras, and yet understandably want to share lenses between them.

Q. What about using these low cost Kiev Lenses on other Cameras?

Kiev/USA is now listing Hasselblad 2000 mount versions of the Kiev lenses (added in April 1999). While reportedly not auto-diaphragm action, these lenses will mount on the Hasselblad 2000 series focal plane shutter camera bodies. Other Hasselblad repair shops will modify Kiev lenses to fit on various cameras, including Hasselblads (cost $300-400 US). This option works partly as the Kiev cameras are copies of the earlier Hasselblad 1600f/1000f bodies, including lens registration distances.

Q. What about accessories for these early SLRs?

The Kiev factory has been quite smart in making adjustments to the Kiev camera accessory lines to enable their accessories to fit other more expensive cameras. For example, some of the Kiev metering prisms fit the Hasselblad bodies (but be wary of using some polaroid backs!), providing a low-cost Hasselblad metering prism option (e.g., for under $175 US). Given the cost of a new or most used Hasselblad metering prisms, you could save enough to buy a Kiev camera and lens ($550 US) just by buying their $175 US prism for your Hasselblad.

You may also be able to use parts from a waist level finder to mount these Kiev-88 prisms on other cameras too. I have also seen Bronica EC metering prisms mounted on Hasselblads using this trick.

Other accessories such as tilt/shift bellows may also be readily adapted with a bit of ingenuity and an extension tube or other lens mount mechanism. A dual plunger cable release is often used to stop-down and then trip the camera shutter.

Lots of other accessories can be shared between medium format systems with a little research and experimenting. For example, there are Bay I/II/III to standard filter thread adapters, enabling you to share low cost 49mm or similar filters between 35mm and TLR cameras. Similarly, I use a B50-52mm adapter to share filters between my Nikons and Hasselblad 500c bayonet filter mount. Cokin filter adapters also exist for various bayonets too.

Q. What about using lenses from older MF systems on other or newer MF cameras?

The Kiev Pentacon 6 mount lenses can also be used on some other MF cameras (Mamiya 645) with an adapter or on Nikon or Pentax M42 screw mounts using a $35 US adapter for Kiev 60 (Pentacon 6) lenses. A few early third party lenses could be mounted on sundry focal plane shutter MF bodies using adapters, but most are quite expensive today too.

Naturally, you lose many automatic functions with these adapters. But you might find this adapter approach to be a useful budget trick, especially if you start with an Exakta 66 or Kiev 60 and later decide to upgrade to a newer body such as the Mamiya 645 series. See the Exakta 66/Pentacon-6 FAQ for details on differences between related models, but note the limited viewfinder image (only 60% of photo) and relative dimness of some of these designs.

Q. What about home brew lens adapters for focal plane cameras?

If you pick a focal plane camera, you may be able to use adapters to mount lenses onto your body, albeit usually losing automation such as automatic diaphragm operation. For an extensive discussion, see the Homebrew Lenses discussion and related postings.

The classic Bronica 6x6 SLRs (S/C/S2/EC..) had dual lens mounts, including a 57mm x 1mm pitch screw thread mount inside the usual bayonet lens mount. Coupled with the focal plane shutter, this screw thread mounting made it easy to adapt a wide range of lenses from barrel lenses and view camera optics to old folder lenses and even some 35mm telephoto lenses to medium format use. Because of their greater coverage, macrophotography use is also easier on focal plane camera bodies.

Besides Bronicas, some medium format cameras such as the Rollei SLRs provided a lens mount adapter that could be drilled and used to mount odd-ball lenses on their bodies. Look for such a mounting option on your focal plane SLRs. Cost savings from just one or a few adapted lenses can be huge!

Q. What about lens adapters for leaf shutter cameras?

Leaf shutter adapter mounts are much more expensive, but you might be able to use a microscope or other adapter mount with built-in leaf shutter on some models (e.g., Hasselblad 500). Some early 500c series Hasselblads also have a body synch connector for using the rear body shutter with flash synch (as with a bellows setup). Some folks have removed the bad glass from a lens and made an adapter out of the remaining lens mount and compur shutter mechanism. But in general, adapting lenses to leaf shutter camera bodies is a much more difficult task than with focal plane shutter camera bodies.

Q. What about the later model SLRs such as the Mamiya 645, Bronica ETR and ETRS, the Mamiya RB series, and....

These cameras are all fine SLR camera systems, but you may be hard pressed to find one in a budget range. Moreover, be very careful to check the camera out thoroughly before you buy. Many of these cameras have seen very heavy professional use, and are very worn out by the time you get to buy them at a budget price. Adding lenses will also take you beyond the budget range, and most of these modern designs used leaf shutter in lens designs that added greatly to the lens' cost. You can also find many books on these later model SLR designs. See below concerning books.

Q. What about Twin Lens Reflex Medium Format Cameras?

You can find a number of TLRs listed on our Medium Format Camera Library Pages.

My own Classification of TLRs:

1. Rolleiflex - top of the line professional TLRs, collectibles
2. Rolleicord - consumer version of above, less costly models
3. Mamiya TLRs - especially the unique replaceable lenses models
4. Yashicamats and Minolta Autocords - often recommended entry level TLRs
5. Miscellaneous 6x6 TLR copies such as the Ricoh 6
6. Odd Format TLRs such as 4x4cm (usually on 127 film)
7. Currently made low cost TLRs such as Seagull 4A-1 and Lubitel 166

The Rolleiflexes are the Cadillacs of the twin-lens reflex world, and late 3.5f and 2.8f models command a premium as both professional quality and collectible cameras. The optics are usually excellent, the mechanics are simple and reliable, and the camera handles easily and silently. Repairs are readily available, as are parts, due to the long runs and large numbers made.

The low noise of the non-reflex TLRs makes them a favorite with wedding photographers. Some Rolleiflexes feature the same Zeiss designs and quality lenses that you will find on some big name medium format cameras. User condition late model Rolleiflexes can be a bargain, given the superb optics, from $250 US up. But collectible condition Rolleiflexes usually fetch three or more times that amount.

Q. What about the Rolleicord TLRs?

The Rolleicords were the consumer models, with fewer features and less automation, but still very good mechanics. The Rolleicord has a simple twist knob based film advance, unlike the smooth lever advance on the Rolleiflexes which both advances the film and cocks the shutter. On the Rolleicord, a separate lever has to be moved to cock the shutter.

While the Rolleiflex has an automatic moving parallax compensation mask in the viewfinder, the Rolleicord dispenses with this frill. The later models such as the Rolleicord V and Vb series come highly recommended. Optics are usually excellent, and the less expensive f/3.5 lenses do just as well as their faster brethren. Rolleicord costs run from circa $100 US up for a good condition user model.

Q. What about the Mamiya C22/C33 and C220/C330 TLRs?

The Mamiya TLR series included a number of very good fixed lens TLRs, but the real fame belongs to the interchangeable lens/shutter/standards models. You can swap out both the taking and viewer lenses on these models, providing a unique range of interchangeable lenses for these models.

The Mamiya C22 and C220 models are the lower end version, while the C33 and C330 models are the high end models. The C33 and C330 models have a crank that cocks the shutter simultaneously while advancing the film. They also have a deluxe parallax indicator that moves under the focusing screen (as with the high-end Rolleiflex models). This feature is lacking in the lower end C22/C220 models (and in most Rolleicords). The later C220 and C330 models also accept both 120 and 220 film, unlike the 120 limited earlier C22 and C33 models.

Despite sometimes vociferous user debates, the earlier chrome lenses are probably just as good optically as the later black models by many accounts. Because these Mamiya TLRs use a bellows design (as on the later Mamiya RB67 series), you need to check for light leaks and other bellows defects on older or more used cameras. See our Bellows Repair and Bellows Restoration Tricks pages for useful pointers. Otherwise, the bodies and optics have very good reputations for trouble-free performance.

Q. What about the YashicaMats and the Minolta Autocords?

The YashicaMats and Minolta Autocords are often recommended as entry level cameras to new medium format photographers. The lenses are quite good, the design is simple, and large quality enlargements are readily possible. Costs for the latest model YashicaMat 124G have spiraled upwards, mainly because they are so often promoted in popular photography magazine(s) articles as a low cost entry to medium format. The earlier YashicaMat models and Minolta Autocords can also be bargain medium format entry level cameras.

Q. What about the other models of TLRs?

Besides the Minolta Autocords, you can also find Ricoh TLRs and Topcon TLRs and even U.S. made Ansco and Sears (Tower) brand TLR models. Many more TLRs were made in the pre-WWII era, but most are collector's cameras now and unlikely to be of major interest to users due to age, lack of repairs, and the plethora of newer models with better optics and features and less years on them too.

Q. What about specialty TLRs for wide angle, telephoto, or odd formats?

You might also be interested in some of the odd-ball TLRs made, most notable in the various telephoto and wide-angle specialty models of the Rollei factory. See our Medium Format Camera Library Page for extensive Rollei TLR camera links listings. You can also find 4x4cm TLRs, 6x4.5cm, and other non-6x6cm format TLRs too. Some 35mm TLR versions were also made!

Q. What about the current TLR models vs. used TLR models?

We have dealt with the current model SeaGull 4As and Lubitel 166 TLRs above. While these current or recent production TLRs are available inexpensively, we would recommend that you consider a used Rolleicord V or Vb or a YashicaMat-124G as a more expensive but long-term better picture taking investment.

Q. What about optical adapters to add flexibility to non-interchangeable lens TLR models?

A number of clever optical wide-angle and telephoto adapters were devised to provide moderate wide-angle and telephoto pictures with the standard TLR camera models. Unless you get the more expensive premium versions (e.g., Rollei), you will notice a considerable decline in image sharpness and contrast with many cheaper adapters. Similarly, closeup adapters using prisms or tripod mechanics are often challenging to use well or for exact framing. For these kinds of photographs, you should probably be considering the strengths of the medium format SLR models carefully.

Q. Why is a TLR a good second or backup medium format camera?

Consider getting a 6x6cm TLR as a backup to your 6x6cm SLR. The TLR is lighter, quieter, a bit funky, and also fun. Keep our 80% solution in mind, namely that up to 80% of all contest winning photographs might be taken with just the normal lens. That's good news if you buy a fixed lens TLR, since you get a lot of picture taking quality for very little money.

Q. What about folder cameras?

Folders are neat, lightweight, quiet, easily carried, and most are older collectibles. Most folders had modest optics, often uncoated, usually slow apertures, and are noticeably less sharp than current lens designs. The biggest exception are likely to be the models with higher quality Zeiss lenses or using APO glasses.

Q. What about the Zeiss Ikonta and Super Ikonta folder cameras and related clones such as the Moskva folders?

The Zeiss Super Ikonta B and C models and the related Zeiss Ikonta models are mainly collector's cameras, commanding high prices. Some folks opt for the Ikonta clones such as the Moskva folders, which are a satisfactory, less collectible, and therefore less expensive alternative from the mid-1950s.

Q. What about the popular Voigtlander Bessa series cameras?

The Voigtlander Bessa is also a frequently recommended budget alternative folder, coming in many models and formats from 6x6cm to 6x9cm being common. As with many folders, you have your choice of composing through a tiny prism or a sportsfinder. Like most folders, the Voigtlander Bessas used either Compur or Prontor leaf shutters, lenses from f/3.5 to f/7.7, with speeds from 1 second down to 1/250th. The later Bessa I and Bessa II and Bay Bessas had a variety of lenses available, including some collectible f3.5 lens versions.

Q. What are the common problems to look out for on older folder cameras?

Folders have to be unfolded to use, obviously. That's the source of many problems, from worn-out lens standards that won't hold the lens rigidly at the right distance to take photographs. The bellows are also a frequent source of light leak problems. Again, we recommend you review our companion articles on Bellows Repair and Bellows Restoration for possible solutions.

Q. What about rangefinder cameras?

We will lump the folding rangefinders in with the viewfinder and sportfinder folders above. The classical MF budget rangefinders include the Koni-Omega and Mamiya press cameras. The big advantage of the rangefinder MF cameras is their low cost, ranging from $150 US to $350 and up for the basic camera. Accessory lenses are often hard to find, and often more expensive than a body and lens combined.

Q. What about the Omega, Koni-Omega, and Rapid-Omega rangefinders?

The Koni-Omega and Rapid Omega rangefinders feature a 6x7cm format, interchangeable leaf shutter Seiko shuttered lenses (1 sec to 1/500th), and interchangeable backs. The lenses are quite good, but most models are limited to from 3 to 9 lens options. The Rapid Omega has excellent lenses and takes great photographs, but is bulky and heavy in the field.

The term ''rapid'' in Rapid-Omega referred to the push-pull film advance. But the film advance mechanisms of all these cameras don't work well after heavy-fisted handling, and should be carefully checked by buyers. Film advance is separate from cocking the shutter, as the camera bodies are little more than aluminum shells holding back and lens rigidly together.

Q. What about the Mamiya Super 23 and Universal rangefinders?

The Mamiya Standard literally set the standard for the new series. The Mamiya Super 23 takes nine different film types and formats, but only three lenses (65mm, 90mm, 150mm). The Super 23 had an interesting back design that permitted view camera style tilts and shifts, providing a degree of perspective control using the ground glass back on a tripod. The camera could also be used as a fast handling 6x9cm (2''x3'') rangefinder using the sport-finder or rangefinder/viewfinder.

The Mamiya Universal was notable for the number of lenses (9) and other accessories and options. Two camera backs were available, the Mamiya M and the Graflok G back. The use of the standard Graflok back opened up a range of options including ground glass focusing (useful for closeups), polaroids, and various roll-film formats at low cost.

The Universal lacks the back swings and tilts of the Super 23. Various backs enabled 6x4.5, 6x6, 6x7, and 6x9 plus polaroids. Several special lenses had to be provided for full-frame coverage on the larger 3 1/4'' x 4 1/4'' polaroid backs, as the regular lenses vignetted at the corners.

The bulky shape and weight of these press cameras will discourage some budget buyers, but the low used prices and format flexibility calls out for a closer look. The larger 6x7 and 6x9 formats are usually quite expensive, especially for this level of optical quality and flexibility.

Q. What about the Graflex XL and XLRF cameras?

The Graflex XL is a 6x9cm camera featuring interchangeable Zeiss optics and interchangeable Graflok backs permitting a range of formats (6x6cm, 6x7cm, 6x9cm). The Graflex XLRF features a rangefinder setup. While 50 exposure 70mm film backs and polaroid backs and even a rare 4x5" back are available, the standard lenses are aimed to cover only 6x9cm without vignetting (as when using 4x5" backs). The Graflex XLSW with its 47mm super angulon lens is one very interesting option for wide angle photography.

Older Graflex RH backs (with roll knobs) have major film flatness problems (lacking a film pressure plate). Wear in the lens focusing mounts (and broken mounting lugs) are commonly reported too. Lenses include 58mm, 80mm, 95mm, 100mm, 180mm and 270mm variants in a leaf shutter bayonet mount. The big attraction to many buyers is the multiple formats with Zeiss optics.

This camera system was the last model of the reknowned Graflex Corp. and is similar to the Mamiya Press and Universal models in many respects. Prices have gone up significantly, partly due to collectors and the interest in the Zeiss lenses.

See also postings on medium format rangefinder pages and Graflex XL Review. Ron Bennett has also kindly contributed his own user Graflex Review with many hints and suggestions on use. Enjoy!

Q. What about press cameras?

There are many press cameras that are either natively medium format (6x9cm) or can take roll-film backs and deliver such images. As with the rangefinders discussed above, the press cameras offer a bulky, heavy, but also flexible and relatively low-cost but high quality approach to medium format.

The many types of press cameras, let alone models, are too numerous for us to cover in detail here. Some of the most popular cameras are the pricey Linhofs and the budget Century and Speed Graflex cameras. A Miniature Speed Graflex model also offered 6x9cm formats.

But be careful to ensure that bellows are still light-tight, viewing mechanisms work properly, and lens mounts are sturdy. Check for light leaks on the backs too. Many of these press cameras were used professionally by the press, hence their name. However, the designs were simple, rugged, and readily repairable.

Lenses are widely available, and offer many options, but note that many early lenses are uncoated. One of the biggest attractions of the press cameras and view camera cameras is for unique medium format panoramic coverage cameras at relatively low cost.

Rodenstock Granddagon wide angle 75mm f4.5 view camera lens (s/n 891xxx) in Copal #0 shutter and on Sinar Lens board Photo courtesy of br@en.com

Q. What about view cameras?

It may seem paradoxical to include view cameras in a medium format camera review, but think again. View cameras can be used with a variety of roll-film reducing backs to achieve formats from 6x4.5cm to 6x9cm, 6x12cm, 6x17cm and even larger. Specialty medium format cameras such as the Fuji series also fill some of these niches, but a look at current medium format camera prices will convince you they aren't in most budgets. By contrast, a 4'' x 5'' view camera can be purchased for as little as $150 US and used with roll-film backs that cost circa $100 US and up.

Many photographers don't realize that most view camera users have far fewer lenses than their 35mm brethren. It isn't unusual to see people using just a few lenses to perform a range of work. Moreover, thanks to the bellows, you can use the standard lenses for closeup work in most cases.

Q. What about current or recent panoramic medium format cameras?

Most of the cameras are highly specialized, and poor choices for the average limited budget medium format newbie. The broadest line is offered by Fuji, in formats from 6x4.5cm (Fuji GA645i and GA645Wi), 6x7cm (Fuji GW670III), 6x8cm (Fuji GX680III), 6x9cm (Fuji GW690III) to even 6x17cm (Fuji GW690III). Unfortunately, none of these cameras fit into most budget ranges directly, and even used models still command a premium.

Q. What about budget panoramic medium format photography?

The short answer is making your own can be much cheaper, if you have the skills. The Larscan 360 degree panoramic camera uses add-on motors to turn a low cost folder camera through 360 degrees on a tripod while pulling film past a slit (acting as a shutter).

Another exciting alternative is to use your computer and scanner to assemble multiple images into a panoramic image. Some software is available at low or no cost.

You can also modify older film format cameras such as the low cost ($50 US range) Kodak #1A or #3A "postcard" cameras. The resulting 6x12cm "postcard panoramic camera" is a very low cost entry to medium format panoramics too.

Q. How about a Hasselblad/Fuji Xpan panoramic on a beer budget?

Look into modifying a Nimslo 3D camera ($25 US), which has a 22mm x 72mm film channel (significantly longer than the Xpan's 65mm channel). Remove the four stereo 3D photography lenses, and mount a lens with leaf shutter (from a TLR or folder). RIT's Prof. Andrew Davidhazy's converted Nimslo panoramic photos shows what can be achieved!

Q. What about very wide angle medium format photography on a budget?

See our Very Wide and Ultrawide angle medium format lenses pages.

Choices include:

• Custom Built:
• Hasselblad Superwide with 38mm Biogon lens ($1,200+)
• Plaubel or Brooks Veriwide 100 (47mm S/A) ($600+)
• Graflex XLSW with 47mm Super Angulon lens (6x9cm, rangefinder) ($900+)
• Rangefinders:
• 58/60mm on Koni-Omega 6x7cm RF ($250+)
• 50mm on Mamiya Universal 6x6/9 RF ($500+)
• SLRs:
• 40mm Nikkor on classic Bronica ($400+)
• 35mm and 40mm on Kowa 6/66 ($900+)
• Kiev 88/60 with 30mm fisheye ($200+!!)
• View Cameras:
• View cameras lenses (65mm S/A, 90mm..) ($300+ up!)
• Panoramics:
• panoramic coverage MF cameras (budget?)

Q. What about the budget panoramic alternatives you hinted at above?

Okay, recall that the existing current medium format panoramic camera options are uniformly, even obscenely high prices. There are even homebrew panoramic cameras too. Usually these cameras share a common design based around a view camera wide angle lens.

The same view camera wide angle lens can be used at the same distance in many view cameras (although a wide angle bellows and standards may be needed for some uses). You can cut-down film from a 4'' x 5'' negative to a desired 6cm x 9cm or even 6cm x 12cm panoramic shot. You can also use a roll-film holder of the appropriate format. Using a 5'' x 7'' view camera, you can even get a 6cm x 17cm negative!

The biggest expense in such a setup is not the camera or standard film holder, but the wide angle lens. A number of buyers realize that they can get very good performance out of the less popular older, often uncoated, versions of these wide angle lenses. The savings are often 75% or more. Using this view camera approach, the budget medium format photographer can explore multiple panoramic formats. The view camera user also enjoys a wide lattitude of view camera tilts and shifts, unlike the easier to handhold but fixed lens panoramic medium format cameras.

Q. What about older panoramic camera options?

Since panoramic photography often starts at a 2:3 aspect ratio or better, you can do panoramic photography with a humble under $100 US 6x9cm folder (such as a Voigtlander Bessa). You can also use some rangefinders, such as the Mamiya Universal with its 6x9cm format.

Another panoramic option is based on finding an older camera that uses large but now obsolete film sizes. You may be able to find an older user condition camera that can be used with 120 roll-film thanks to simple to make adapters. Some of these cameras are simply over-sized folders with older lenses (i.e., uncoated) which nonetheless cover the larger format. By projecting the scene onto 120 roll-film, you end up with a panoramic format image.

With most panoramic setups, getting the image is only half the battle. You usually need a 6x9cm or 4'' x 5'' or even 5'' x 7'' enlarger to print your images.

Q. What about odd-ball medium format cameras?

Most odd-ball medium format cameras are expensive specialty cameras designed to solve a particular photographic problem. For example, the Alpa SWA model superwide camera also offers perspective control features on a 6x12cm format. The panoramic Noblex 135 is so wide it takes in 135 degrees, about the same as your eyes. You can even get a Tachihara 6x24cm camera. After that, there are other specialty 70mm roll-film cameras that can take a 360 degree circular image using a moving camera and slit technique. But these specialty cameras obviously aren't cheap even if bought used.

Q. What about 4x4cm medium format cameras?

The most affordable odd-ball cameras, and most interesting to most new medium formatters, are at the other extreme - the 4x4cm cameras. These cameras are typified by the Baby Rolleiflex 4x4cm camera, although many 127 film models were made. Although 127 film is no longer made commercially, you can buy respooled film or respool your own. Film is often cut down from larger 120 roll-film emulsions and respooled. The film also usually has to be home processed, although a few commercial labs will process this film for a fee.

Q. What is the attraction of Superslides?

The major attraction of 4x4cm film is that these square format slides can be mounted and projected in regular 35mm projectors. Mamiya superslide cutters can be purchased for under $30 US (KEH). The 4x4cm mounts can be gotten from Porter's Camera Store, among many other sources. The resulting Superslide has about double the film area and impact of a conventional slide. Compared to a 6x6cm slide, superslides are about half the size, but don't require expensive medium format slide projectors.

If you already have a 35mm slide projector, you can simply compose slides in your medium format camera which can be directly cut-out and mounted as superslides. Simply get your images processed and mounted in sleeves, instead of slides. Now you can just cut them out and mount them in superslide mounts, and project them normally. A template can be mounted under many medium format waist level finders (SLR or TLR) or otherwise mounted to make such composition easier.

Published reports suggest that some MF camera makers markup their camera bodies a minimal 5% or so, in order to encourage you to get into their system. Once you have bought into their system, they sell their lenses and accessories at a much larger markup to recoup lost profits.

Their sales approach means that you will get the most value for your money by buying just the minimally marked up body and normal lens, and using our 80% solution described above.

Many newbies think it is a conspiracy. But the real reason is the very limited size of the market and the high quality of professional lens performance usually demanded. There are very few third party lens makers making medium format lenses. You will have much less choice than with 35mm lenses. We will suggest some budget alternatives that you may find interesting below.

Q. Can you give an example of a budget third party lens option in MF SLRs today?

One interesting example is a 500mm f/8 glass lens, settable from f/8 to f/22, that comes in mounts for Pentax 645, Mamiya 645, and various 6x6 focal plane SLRs. A November 1997 Popular Photography review by Keppler cited these $395 lenses from Cambridge Camera Exchange for the low cost (vs. $5,000 for similar 500mm f/8 prime lenses) and reasonable sharpness.

But wait, it gets better. See postings for dealing directly with Zorkendorfer to buy the adapter tube for $100 US. The 500mm f/8 Korean lens is only $99 new, and often available used for circa $50 US. So here is a case where a third party lens is available, but even with doubling the price, the lens is still a dozen times cheaper than similar focal length medium format alternatives.

Finally, you can do it yourself for even less. I homebrewed an adapter from a $3 PVC coupling and an extension tube (reusable) and some PVC pipe. For under $5 US, I adapted a $50 used 500mm f/8 to use on my Bronica S2A focal plane shutter camera. That's one per cent of the cost of a Hasselblad equivalent, albeit of higher optical quality ;-). So if you are on a tight budget, this approach may open some interesting options.

Q. What is the 80% solution?

In a companion article on Curing Lens Envy, I note that 80% of all contest winning photographs in one major study were found to be taken with the normal camera lens. If you can live with just a normal lens and that 80% capability (supplemented by your 35mm camera), you can put all of your medium format money into the best affordable camera and lens setup.

Q. What is Medium Format Lens Envy, Bongo's Law, and how do they effect MF buyers on a budget?

Bongo's Law is The cost of the lens is inversely proportional to the frequency of its use. A super-wide or super-telephoto is likely to cost 40 or more times as much per photo as the normal lens in typical use. The normal lens is usually your fastest, sharpest, and cheapest lens on most systems. Any additional lens is probably going to be used much less, cost a lot more, and be either substantially slower in aperture or heavier and much more costly.

Many 35mm users are shocked to discover that many 35mm lenses have no equivalent in the medium format field at any price on many big-name systems. Super-wide angle and fisheye optics are one example. Most long telephoto lenses may be very expensive if available for MF SLR mounts (e.g., $20,000 US for 500mm Rollei MF SLR lens). Even moderate telephoto or wide angle lenses in MF mounts may each cost more than the original camera lens and body.

Very few zoom lenses are available, and most are short range, such as the new in 1998 Mamiya 645 Zi that covers only a 1.6x range (34 to 56mm equivalent on 35mm). This fact means you can't make do with a zoom. You either buy a lot of high-priced lenses to cover the zoom's range, or you do a lot of walking to get the most out of your normal lens.

Since you have a large film area, you can use an enlarger or slide duplicator to zero in on a desired portion of the large MF image. Naturally, you lose some size benefits by cropping, but you get the same perspective as if you had used a telephoto lens from the same position.

The best for what? See Mamiya's Why Size Counts for a good feeling of the impact of different medium formats. In general, the bigger the image, the better. At B&H's Intro to MF page, you can see the five most common medium formats laid out in one actual size graphic. Each has its own merits and feel. Many 35mm users are uncomfortable at first with square composition. But the number of professional square camera systems sold over time (TLR as well as SLR) suggests they must be popular with many professional photographers, right?

You can always cut a larger format image down into a smaller one, or crop it that way in the darkroom, but not vice versa. Proponents of 6x4.5cm formats note that you have to crop any 6x6cm square negative to those proportions to make an 8x10 or 16x20 print. True, but you can also decide whether to crop vertically or horizontally from 6x6cm. You also have some slack in what you crop out. Conversely, the smaller 6x4.5cm cameras are more convenient and marginally cheaper to operate over time. Some professional photographer articles suggest that paying clients are beginning to prefer the 6x7cm size over 6x6cm and 6x4.5cm.

See comments about cutting film above. You can buy a film cutter for as little as $29, while most backs cost ten times that or more. You can also put a clear plastic mask under most waist level finders (TLR or SLR) or prisms. Scribe both horizontal and vertical markings for 6x4.5cm and 6x6cm (in a 6x7cm camera) into the plastic. Now you can use these visual guides to help you compose for these other formats, then cut down your images from 6x7cm or 6x6cm to the smaller format. This approach is one of the cheapest and easiest ways to get multiple smaller formats if you need or want them from one MF camera.

Q. The kindest or cruelest cut of all? Should you cut film, or not?

Film is easily cut, and commercial cutters are available for this purpose. The Mamiya superslide cutter is a good example of this approach.

Hasselblad sold superslide 16S backs, but users preferred to cut down superslides from the 6cmx4.5cm backs instead. This approach allowed some slack in trimming the slide, often improving the final composition and placement of cuts for mounted slides. Unlike the 16S backs (limited to 4x4cm), you could also use the 6x4.5cm backs for both 4x4cm and 6x4.5cm work.

I suggest that the perceived economy of using 15 or 16 exposure backs or the smaller 6x4.5cm cameras may be minimal over the long term. You can always cut a 6x7cm down to 6x6cm or 6x4.5cm, but you can't do the reverse.

To facilitate this process, many photographers put a simple 6x4.5cm horizontally and vertically pair of markings on a plastic template under their waist level or prism viewfinder (on SLR, obviously). You can easily compose a 6x4.5cm shot, if desired, either horizontally or vertically and just as if you had swapped out to a particular back.

Now that such backs often cost $300 or more each, it would take a lot of saved film to balance out the cost of a few backs (for multiple film types, slide or print, color or black and white and so on, in each format). Conversely, imagine if your extra film area meant that you saved just one picture on a roll that would have been otherwise lost on a more limited 6x4.5cm back. How much is that worth, versus the slightly larger cost of film?

This observation is not aimed at denigrating the smaller 6x4.5cm or 6x6cm formats. Rather, be aware that even a seemingly fixed format 6x6cm or 6x7cm camera has a lot more flexibility if you see film for what it is - something you can chop up as you want or need too.

Q. What about fixing up old MF cameras?

Start by looking at the Hasselblad gearing at Romney's Repair site and see if it looks complicated to you. It shouldn't, as the Hassy has very simple guts compared to say the Bronica S2.

Unless you have the parts and tools, manuals and especially the experience, you are unlikely to be able to repair most cameras and lenses. Parts are so hard to get for most older cameras and lenses that repair is a real problem.

One solution is to buy several bodies so as to have a backup. Now you can carry on if one body breaks and is off for repair for three months. You can also buy a "parts" body to send off to the repair shop so they will have a source of parts. You can even buy repair manuals (e.g., on EBAY or online, and send them with your older camera for repair too. Better yet, use our list of repair shops to locate someone who specializes in older camera repairs such as yours.

Repair issues are also a good reason to carefully consider whether that Corfield 66 MF SLR is such a good buy, as repairs and accessories may be impossible to get. If you invest in a lot of lenses and accessories, and then can't get the body repaired if a shutter breaks, you may have a hard time finding a working body in some older lower-cost models.

Finally, this repair problem is about to impact many current MF SLRs which use electronics and especially LCD display panels. A number of camera manufacturers have observed numerous failures in LCDs after only a decade of use. These displays age even if just sitting around unused, so stocking up on parts won't solve the problem. Likewise, the electronic chips in older SLRs are no longer made, and a dead donor body is the only source for replacements. But these same electronics chips are often the Achille's heel of these electronic MF cameras, so finding replacements may get increasingly difficult. I predict that many current electronic MF cameras will retire early to the collector shelves due to the lack of replacement parts.

Q. What is the 80% solution?

A study of photo contest winning photographs showed that nearly 80% were taken with the normal lens alone. The normal lens is also usually the fastest, sharpest, and cheapest lens available.

By sticking with the normal lens alone, you can enjoy the 80% solution while avoiding the exorbitant cost of interchangeable lenses on MF.

Q. Is there not some alternative to high priced MF lenses?

Yes. In many cases, you can adapt lenses for use on MF cameras at low cost. See homebrew lenses article for many examples dealing with telephoto lenses to macrophotography.

This approach works best on focal plane shutter cameras. The classic Bronica S2a/EC series are among the easiest to adapt lenses for, thanks to a built-in screw thread (57mm x 1mm pitch) lens mount and an integral helical focusing mount on the camera body (not the lens). However, other focal plane cameras such as Rolleiflex have lens blank mounts that can be drilled out to mount a desired lens. Finally, many lenses can be mounted on bellows adapters, enabling their use on your MF camera and bellows combination.

By using a focal plane shutter camera, you can suddenly regard any lens with adequate coverage and a longer lens registration distance as a candidate for adapting. Many 6x6cm and larger folder lenses can be had for $10 US and up. View camera lenses can be easily adapted too. If that lens has a built-in leaf shutter, you may gain much wider flash synchronization with this approach too. Macrophotography is particularly easy, as lens coverage expands in macro work. Even 8mm and 16mm glass lenses can be put to use as low cost bellows macrolenses. Your 35mm macrolens can also be used on MF, acting as if it were on an extension tube. In short, the choice of a focal plane MF SLR camera may open up some lens adapting options that could greatly reduce your overall system costs or extend your system versatility considerably.

Q. What about MF camera owners who only have a single lens?

Many lens adapters exist for front of the lens use with normal camera lens. Examples include fisheye 180 degree adapters (.18x) and super wide angle mutars (.42x) as well as wide angle and telephoto adapters. Some medium format camera designs can also use telephoto converters mounted behind the lens. Finally, there are a number of fixed diopter and even a 1x to 10x variable diopter front of the lens mounting optic that enables closeup work too.

This is great news!! Using a .42x super wide angle mutar, your normal 80mm lens becomes more like a 32mm super wide angle medium format lens, only for a hundred times less money. Similarly, the 180 degree circular fisheye adapter converts your normal lens to .18x or 14mm circular fisheye. The moderate .75x wide angle adapters act like 60mm lens on medium format, and the moderate telephoto 1.25x adapter converts your 80mm normal lens into a 100mm lens. Naturally, the quality isn't as great as a far more expensive prime lens, but neither is the cost!

It is relatively easy to make homebrew telephoto lenses for focal plane cameras such as the classic Bronica 6x6s. You can even buy an upgraded 500mm f/8 Korean glass lens in various medium format focal plane shutter camera mounts for under $400 US (or under $200 directly). But it is very hard to adapt wide angle lenses to most medium format cameras, so you may find these superwide and fisheye adapters very handy. They also work with 35mm and even view camera lenses with the right filter thread mounting adapters.

Abstracted in part from Medium Format on a Budget by Bob Shell, Shutterbug, January 1992.

[Ed. note: Looking for more information on current cameras?]

"How to Select and Use Medium Format Cameras" - book
By Theodore DiSante, published by HP Books
Softcover, 192 pages.

This book covers (in detail) the following cameras:

• Hasselblad 500C/M, 500EL/M,SWC/M and 2000C
• Mamiya M645, 1000S, M645 and M645J
• Mamiya RB76 Pro-S
• Mamiya C330f and C220
• Rolleiflex SLX
• Pentax 6X7
• Bronica ETR-S and ETR-C
• Bronica SQ
• Yashica Mat-124G

Covers lenses, viewfinders, metering, winders, backs, close-up equipment, filters and other accessories.

Related Postings

From: marcus@vestek.com (Mark Robert Stephen)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Re: beginning medium formatter...need advice
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998

scott crenshaw wrote:
I'm about to enter the world of medium format, just one problem. I'm 19 and work for minimum wage. I was looking at taking my chances with the Kiev, I've seen a 60 and they looked like a pretty good camera. I also looked at the 80, which is a little more what i was wanting. My problem is affordability. about $500 is my limit. I've used a Mamiya RB67 and liked what i saw..anyway, if you have a good deal let me know or if you can give me some advice let me know..

Thanks - Scott

From: David & Robyn Brown jorde@swbell.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Re: Getting information on medium format.
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 1998

Clifford Conklin wrote:

I would like to start learning about medium format. Does anyone know of some good resources I could research on my own? I'm interested in this but have ablolutely no experience. Should I really be starting out at a more basic level? I picked up an issue of Shutterbug that featured medium format. Since I've started reading about it, I think I would rather start there than 35mm. Is too far a stretch to get started??

Clifford:

All other things being equal - you would (probably) be happier with
medium format.  However, all things are not equal.  I use both MF and
35mm.  If you are just starting out in photography, I would recommend
35mm, because

-       medium format equipment is much more expensive (with exceptions)
-       film and processing costs are more per frame            
-       if you are not planning to do your own darkroom work, you may have
trouble finding someone to process your film, depending on where you are
-       if you are planning to do your own darkroom, your enlarger (probably)
and the lens (almost for sure) will also cost more for MF

MF gives you more negative, but it costs more and may be difficult to
obtain lab work.

Buy a nice 35mm SLR and learn to use a "camera".  Learn fstops and
shutter speeds, etc.  (MF is not auto-everything).  After a while, if
you still want MF, nothing will stop you!

If you want to ignore this advice -it's been done :)- find the website
called Medium Format Digest and also look at
rec.photo.equipment.medium-format.  Then buy a TLR or a Kowa for under
$500 and shoot lots of film!                   
Good luck.

David 

Scott,

While the Kiev 60 may be fine for you, owners have reported enough common problems with them that I'd be wary of using it as my only camera. The good news is that there are a number of good choices within your price range that'll be both inexpensive enough and reliable.

The Bronica S2 and S2a fit the bill very well, as does the Kowa Super 66. A more modern choice could be the Bronica ETR (or, possibly an ETRS). Another well thought of SLR is the Graflex Norita 66.

If an SLR is not an absolute requirement, the Mamiya C330, offers interchangable lenses, great quality and is in your pricepoint. The Koni Omega Rapid, Koni-Omegaflex TLR and the Mamiya Universal press are options you might consider as well.

If you'ld like to know more about your choices, email me and I'll mail you back copies of a FAQ like series on medium format called the 'Overview' series. These should cover most of your questions and help you make an educated choice.

Danny Gonzalez

From: Martin F. Melhus melhus@fdrc.iit.edu
Subject: Response to Economical way to start SLR Medium Format Photography
Date: 1998-02-26

I'd recommend picking up a copy of McBrooms guide to cameras. It has a pretty decent section on medium format systems, and approximate figures for prices as well. It should run $25.00 new, $24 mint, $22 ex+, $20 ex, $18 good, $12 user, $7 bargain :-). [McBroom's Book at Barnes and Nobles]

That said, if you want really economical, look at TLRs. The Yashica Mat 124G is a nice basic TLR with a decent fixed lens for about $200. Mamiya C2 and C3 (and 22, 33, 220 and 330) systems have interchangable lenses but will run more. The Rolleis are also nice, but pricier.

If you really want SLR on the cheap, I'd look at Kowa. They are no longer made, but have a decent following and are available at camera shows and swap meets, as well as on many of the used camera web sites. 3 models were made, the 6, the 6mm (with mirror lockup), and the super 66. Only the last has interchangable backs. All the lenses have leaf shutters, so you can flash sync at all speeds (up to 1/500.) And there are several lenses available.

There's also Kiev cameras, but you should know that the mechanical parts of this camera are somewhat unreliable (some people can tolerate the quirks, others hate them with a passion.) The optics are reported to be top notch, though. Inquire with people more knowledgeable about these cameras than me, (hint, hint to you Kiev and older Hassy users out there.)

Going up in price, there's the Pentax 645 and 67, and then the Mamiya stuff, the Bronica stuff, and the Hasselblad and Rollei SLR stuff. All of those will set you back big bucks (I'd guess $1000 with one lens and one back. And adding lenses and backs will be more expensive as well.)

Good luck.

Regards,

From: mthebo@indiana.edu (Michael Alan Thebo)
[1] Re: Low budget medium format questions
Date: Wed Apr 01 

I think we need to make a distinction about quality in terms of fine
grain and also sharpness and contrast, these are all seperate issues.

Assuming processing, film etc at kept constant, and MF will have less
grain than any 35mm, even a Lubitell vs a Leica.

Sharpness is a factor of both film size and line pair per mm capabilites
of the lens. Basically if you can get more line pairs on the MF film,
which is quite a bit larger, you will be sharper. So we can see that a   
fair MF lens can be better than an excellent 35mm lens. The Leica
probably would be a Lubitell here as the Lubi has a junky lens craved for
just this reasons... any Yaschica MF without a lens problem would
definately beat an affordable 35mm though. A Yashicamat 124 (or
equivelent) would out perform the Leica except maybe wide open.

Contrast is a function of lens flare and also body flare. Any uncoated
lens will have more flare than a multi coated lens, with single coated
lenses, comparisons will need to take into account lens design
(especially how many air to glass surfaces there are). Any decent body
should have minimal if any flare issues.

> I'd rather have a contrasty, sharp 35mm slide or negative than an unsharp,
> streaky 6X6 one.   I'd suspect the average 35mm point and shoot or an older,
> used 35mm SLR will produce better pictures than a $100 medium format camera.

As for film cost. Last time I checked at roll or 120 Plus-X etc cost LESS
than a roll of 36-135 Plus-X. Ok, I get a little under half the number of
images, BUT I (and most other people) shoot fewer frames in MF and slow
down to think more about what I am doing that I would w/ 35mm. This means
I get more images that I end up printing off of a roll of 120.

For processing costs, this depends... Pro quality labs souping your 120 
are a very different thing than taking a roll of 35mm to the corner store
for double prints. If you do it at home, a roll of 120 needs the same
amount of chemistry to submerse it as 2 rolls of 35mm, so this could
double your chemical costs per roll for developer if you don't use
replunishing (?sp) developers. If you do, and for other chemistry, it is
around the same price per roll as 35mm.

You can see from this that my costs for film and chemistry are the same,
or probably a bit lower than if I were to shoot 35mm.

just some thoughts...

Mike Thebo
mthebo@indiana.edu 

[Ed. note: this posting highlights the importance of system planning to factor in all your lens costs and utilities; for example, a 50mm plus 80mm plus 200mm lens plus teleconverter lets you cover 50/80/100/160/200/400 range with minimal overlap, while a 40/80/150 trio plus teleconverter would only provide 40/80/150/160/300 range...]

From: jchow@atom.isl.melco.co.jp (James Chow)
[1] Re: Hassy Lens Question
Date: Tue Apr 07 1998

The 40mm in 6x6 is about the same as a 25mm in 135. I use a 40, 90, 180, 300, and tc. The focal lengths are nearly all factors of two. If you go with something like a 40, 60, and 80 or 90, you not only spend a great deal more money, but use one lens or another less often. THe 60 is around equivalent to a 35m in 135. I almost bought a 60mm in addition to the lenses I already have and figured I'd just use my 90 or 40 less often, not to mention it was another 2 lbs to drag around and another $2500.

--Jim

From: "Jerry Houston" jerryh@oz.net
Subject: Re: Desiring medium format--help!!
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1998

This reply makes it sound as if the only affordable choices are Yashica Mats (or their Rollei or Minolta equivalents) and Hasselblads. What you said about these is right on, but there's a whole 'nother class of entry-level medium format cameras that offer many advantages.

The MF rangefinder cameras, like the Koni-Omega, Graflex XL, Mamiya Universal Press, etc., can often be found in good "user" condition with a normal lens for $200 - $300. Compared to a typical 6x6 TLR, here's what they offer:

Much bigger usable negative size for prints made on any standard paper. Fits full-frame on 8x10, 16x20, etc. EASILY turned for vertical shot if appropriate. Most are designed to be hand-held easily, and have vibration-free operation due to their lack of a reflex mirror and their leaf shutters.

If the shot you want really DOES fit perfectly on a 6x6 negative, it'll fit just fine on a 6x7 negative too, with very little cropping.

MUCH better viewfinder that you can use comfortably at eye-level, and you can follow action with it. The image doesn't display backwards, and subject movement doesn't happen backwards. You don't get disoriented from trying to frame your subject and look at it without the camera.

Accurate rangefinder focusing that even works pretty well in low light. The viewfinder of an entry-level TLR can be pretty dismal.

Most of the 6x7 and 6x9 rangefinder cameras have interchangeable lenses. Of the budget-priced TLR's, only the older Mamiya C-series do, and lenses for those are large, heavy, and expensive when they're found in good condition. Remember, each "lens" has to be two matched lenses.

Most of the MF rangefinders also have interchangeable backs, and some are even of the magazine type, allowing you to change film in mid-roll without wasting any. Some even have sheet-film backs available, for even more flexibility.

Great shots have been made with Yashica Mats, old Rolleicords, Autocords, Ricohflexes, and so on. But it doesn't make sense to ignore all the advantages inherent in professional-quality medium format rangefinder cameras. There are some real bargains out there, if you just look around a little.

Dante A. Stella wrote ...
>
>
>By far the best way into MF is a twin-lens reflex. They have easy
>focusing, square (croppable both ways) format, and cheap filters. A MF SLR
>is a wonderful thing, but it represents a very large investment. The TLR
>has much less vibration and is easier to hold onto. The only drawback is
>lack of interchangeable lenses and backs. If you check Hasselblad prices,
>a back or a wide or tele lens costs multiples of what a Yashicamat, an
>Autocord or a cheap Rollei does. You should be able to snag one for under
>$200. 

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: dmk9561@tntech.edu (Dave Killeffer)
Re: Desiring medium format--help!!
Date: Thu Apr 16 1998

Lubitels and Seaguls are good choices, but the cheapest medium format I've ever seen is a Volga. It uses 120 film, has a cheap plastic lens and body, and should cost less than $15.

Dave Killeffer
dmk9561@tntech.edu

From: n2znc@aol.com (N2ZNC)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Desiring medium format--help!!
Date: 19 Apr 1998

Toni, being in your shoes years ago, I can tell you that the best advice that I ever got regarding purchasing equip came from a teacher of mine.

You have to be honest with yourself. I have been a photographer for 12 years, the last five as a full time working professional who seeks out his own work, represents himself and make a good living. Im not rich, but comfortable. In photography you have to hustle, if you dont you fall behind and lose jobs.And jobs are money.....

If you are serious about photography, you are better off purchasing first, used equip. Buy it from a decent store, or from someone you know and can trust. As far as for systems, 6x6 is for photographers who cannot follow instructions about properly placing the object photographed or doesnt know anything about cropping. My advice is for you to purchase a good 6x7 system that will last you a long time. 6x7 is the optimal camera for all types of work, with the next best camera being a good 4x5. But you have to ask yourself about the type of work you are going to be doing. If you are going to be shooting sports, car racing, boating, baseball etc. then a good 35 mm is what you need. Portraiture/commercial work in general a good 6x7. Architectural/mural size or large photographs that demand extreme detail, demand 4x5,......

You could find a good Mamiya RB67 ProS with a standard lens,back,pola back and Waist level finder for under $1600.00 easily. They are heavy duty cameras as well as heavy cameras. I have been using them for years, with never any problems and I still use the first one that I bought when I was in school, 13 years ago (RB67) although I prefer the RZ now...

Dont purchase rangefinders or twin lens....They are for playing around.....

If you are serious about photography and making money and doing work, then save your dollars and buy a good system that will last a life time. Stay away from stuff that you wont use after you become a pro......

George
Professional Photographer in NYC.On-location Commercial photographer.

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: Bob Flood bflood@slac.stanford.edu
[1] Re: M format basics
Date: Tue May 12 1998

Robert Monaghan wrote: > You will find a lot of info online too, esp. at my medium format megasite ;-) > > check out http://www.dejanews.com for past postings > > I also recommend hitting the books

All good advice - do all of this.

And another idea that may help. If you live in an area that has camera shows and swap meets, go to one or more (after you've done your reading). There's no substitute for holding a camera, focusing, etc to help decide whether you want to buy one. Camera shows are a great way to see a variety of makes and models, although not the newest, and learn how they feel. You will also get a chance to hear opinions of various cameras and manufacturers as well.

--
Bob Flood
bflood@slac.stanford.edu

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "John Stewart" radiojohn@email.msn.com
[1] Re: Seagull and Great Wall
Date: Wed May 13 1998

The $80 model is not a Seagull, but a "Great Central" with a top speed of 1/500 as opposed to the 1/300 on others! Dual format and nice performer for the money.

John

From: jalbert@nyx.nyx.net (Joseph Albert)
Subject: Re: Low Cost Medium Format
Date: Tue, 26 May 1998

Jeffrey Karp   wrote:
> Are there any decent,INEXPENSIVE medium format cameras
>(preferably an slr that takes interchangeable lenses)?
>I guess they can't use 35mm camera lenses. 

In the arena of discontinued, and no longer supported for repairs by the manufacturer, are cameras such as:

Kowa SLRs
Bronica S mount SLRs
Koni-Omega rangefinders
Graflex 2x3 Speed, Crown, and Century Graphics
there are others, but the above are the most common

In the arena of no longer made but at least partially if not fully supported with repairs by the manufacturer:

Mamiya TLRs
Mamiya Press cameras

In the arena of cameras that belong to systems that are still sold today:

Mamiya 645, 645-1000s, 645J
Kiev 60
Kiev 88

The Kiev's are quite inexpensive new, but the reliability and ruggedness of the camera bodies is a highly debated subject when the name Kiev comes up. The lenses are well made and of high optical quality. The early Mamiya 645's have the same lens mount as the current ones, and hence offer a way to get an inexpensive body that takes current lenses and accessories.

If you don't need to interchange lenses, there are many different TLRs that were made that are quite inexpensive and produce a very high quality image.

j. albert

From: msherck@aol.com (Msherck)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Opinions needed: Inexpensive medium format SLR?
Date: 20 Mar 1998

>I'm a college student and amateur photographer.
>
>I'm looking for a medium format SLR for under $500.  Used is perfectly
>fine so long as the proofs will be decent.  Or should I just be
>looking for the TLR's, as no such inexpensive medium SLR's exist?

If used is ok, you'll have considerable choice in an under $500 medium format system. For starters, the traditional 'first MF' camera, a twin lens reflex, is going to be much less than $500. Minolta Autocord, Yashicamat (particularly the 124G model,) some of the Rollei TLRs, and possibly the unique Mamiya C220 or C330 interchangable lens TLR cameras are all under $500 in good condition. DO some research if you look at Rollei cameras, however: some Rolleis are dogs.

In the SLR field, one can often find older used Mamiya 645 cameras (the original 645, the 645J, or the 645 1000s) with lens and viewfinder for under $500. You can easily find one of the several models of Kowa 6x6 cameras but they have a spotty reputation: some are great, some are pure junk and it's not easy to tell which is which. Then there are Russian Kiev cameras and Chinese TLRs -- best to do a DejaNews search for comments on these before you set your heart on one. Check out Shutterbug magazine but you'd be well advised to search through DejaNews for postings on specific vendors before ordering: some vendors are good, some not, and many experiances have been posted over time.

Good luck!

Mike Sherck

From: mlanger@ccs.carleton.ca (Mark Langer)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Low budget medium format questions
Date: 24 Mar 1998

Yashicas are getting pricey, and the cheaper early ones have a three element lens, which, while respectable, can't compare to the 4 element lenses offered by later Yashicas or Rolleis with Xenars or Tessars.

My budget choice would be a Ricoh Diacord, which comes with a superb 4 element lens and has not yet become the object of inflation as the Minoltas and Yashicas have in recent years. Don't confuse them with the simpler Ricohflexes with their external geared focussing and three element lenses.

Mark Langer

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: glewis4457@aol.com (GLewis4457)
[1] Re: Whats the big deal with medium format
Date: Sun Jun 14 1998

I have 3 MF cameras, 6x9 Agfa Record folder, 6x6 Zeiss Nettar folder, Kiev 6C 6x6 SLR, total investment about $110.00 and I can put the folders in my pocket.

I can use the Kiev as a boat anchor if the situation demands it. No flames, it takes really nice pics but weighs a bunch. That was the real reason for buying the folders. Nice large negs from a camera I can put in my pocket. Don't tell your friends...that would drive the prices up.

Jerry in Houston

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: heavysteam@aol.com (Heavysteam)
[1] Re: SLR or Rangefinder for MF Landscape Photography?
Date: Sat Jun 20 1998

>I guess the same would apple to TLR cameras, such as the Yashicamat
>124G.  I'm trying to get set up without having to go the route of a
>Hasselblad (super expensive).
>
>Any other suggestions?

Your basic Mamiya 645 is readily available and inexpensive. (You can buy a 645 body w/waist level finder, 80mm F2.8 lens and 120 insert for about $500-$600. Unlike some other inexpensive starter cameras, it projects into the current Mamiya product line. (My older 645 lenses work fine with the current 645 PRO body.)

The Pentax 645 is the same, but the motor drive and metering prism are built into the camera so they sell for much higher prices used.

I would read the article about Russian imports in the current Popular Photographer before considering one of these cameras. The Mamiya lenses are far superior and so is the construction and finish of the cameras, and used Mamiyas are competitive in price to the Russian imports.

From: vrae@hotmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: 645 Lenses
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998

I'm one of those zealots who believes in testing and calibrating every last piece of equipment that goes through the studio. A recent surprise to me was that in my own testing, the lenses from the new Pentax 645N optically outperform their Zeiss equivalents. Other photographers I know who have used the Pentax 645 tell me that the latest "FA" (autofocus) lenses are substantially better than the prior generation, but I can't honestly say I see much of a difference. There aren't enough 645N lenses out yet to convince me that this will hold true across the full line, but the 45, 75 and 300 lenses I've used so far all beat my Zeiss lenses in terms of raw resolving power and contrast.

I've heard similar claims from fellow photographers regarding the Pentax 67, so I don't think my results are a fluke. And no doubt there are Mamiya, Fuji and Bronica users who will report the same findings. Of course, I've heard these same photographers complaining about specific lenses in a manufacturer's line, so to an extent, the answer to "who makes the best MF lenses" probably depends on exactly which lens in the line you're talking about. On the other hand, it would seem that no brand has an across the board monopoly on lens quality.

Now for a few disclaimers.

One, most of my Hasselblad equipment is relatively old, and although well maintained, it's certainly possible that some of the latest lenses may do better. At the limits, things like film flatness tend to be major issues, so my results may also be influenced by things that have nothing to do with lens quality - things like the age and condition of the backs I use (although I do tend to get very similar results from the same lens on a few body/back combinations).

I do have one brand new Hassie system, and although others may disagree, I don't see much real difference in raw optical quality. The modern coatings seem more resistant to flare and the lenses perform a tad....

[Ed. note: glitch in original posting - ends above..]

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998
From: "Paul C. Brodek" pcb@iac.co.jp
Subject: Re: new hasselblad competitors RE: New Hasselblad/ Rumor (longish)

Jim Stewart jstewart@jkmicro.com wrote:

>Do you really want a Tamron lens on your Hasselbad?

Why not? The same question comes up on the Leica list now and then, with a number of people unable to understand why anyone would spend the money for a Leica body only to use a non-Leica lens. There are others happily using older Nikon/Canon L-mount lenses, old/new Russian/Ukranian/wherever L-mount lenses (hope Marc doesn't thrash me on this one), off-off brand lenses and new Konica/Ricoh L-mount lenses. Some of us only consider performance while others balance cost and performance. We don't have much of a choice with Hasselblad right now.

Not everyone photographs for a living, not everyone has the same on-film standards, not everyone can justify buying a lens that costs as much as a car. That doesn't mean the build quality and feel of a Hasselblad doesn't appeal to them. I can pick up a decent used 500C with an 80mm/2.8 T* lens for 120,000 yen (figure US$900 or so), which is not much more than a used Bronica or Mamiya. The entry barrier for a body and standard lens is not that high; but other lenses are another story.

Why is Hasselblad introducing the CB lens line, with the 80mm offering lower performance than its CF counterpart and the 160mm offering lower performance compared to its nearest CF counterpart? I don't think they'd sink the time and money into these lenses if they didn't think there was a market for them. If Tamron could offer an 80mm or 150/160mm lens that outperformed the Hasselblad CBs, for about the same price, you might not buy them because they're not Hasselblad branded but others might.

Tamron is also selling lenses that don't exist in Hasselblad's line----a moderate wide-tele zoom with aspherical lens elements for 160,000 yen list, vs. 600,000 yen list for a Variogon (sorry, don't have any mags handy for exact prices and specs). I could pay for a cushy 2 weeks' vacation in the US for the price difference between these 2 lenses, even if the Tamron price doubled going from 6x4.5 to 6x6 format; or I could buy two or three used Hassy lenses and the Tamron zoom for the price of one Variogon.

The question is not necessarily whether you or I would put a Tamron lens on our Hasselblad, the question is how the market at large will respond. We are a small group of enthusiasts, representing a very small percentage of medium format and Hasselblad users. There are those among us who would never think of using anything but Hassy/Zeiss glass; there are others who would buy a less expensive alternative, especially for less frequently used lenses.

Sorry to drone on for so long, but there are a lot of perfectly valid reasons for buying third-party lenses. If nothing less than Hassy will do for you, that's fine, but what is now offered in the market by Mamiya, Bronica and Fuji is proof that there are many who approach the same cost/performance issues and come up with a different answer. I think Hassy's CB lenses are an attempt to tap the same market.

Regards,

PB

Paul C. Brodek
Kobe, Japan
pcb@iac.co.jp

Editor's Note: You have to take postings like this in stride, knowing that there were several variants of Seagull lenses, or that quality control and ruggedness varied considerably. But the tip is handy ;-)

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: phtoman phtoman@bellsouth.net
[1] Re: Lubitel 166 or Chinese Seagull?
Date: Wed Jul 15 1998

The Chinese just pales to comparison to the Lubitel 166. Last semester, in school, I had the pleasure of trying out both cameras to see which is better. The Russian Optics are razor-sharp, and produce better pictures than that of it's Chinese counter-part. Porter's tends to be a little on the expensive side when searching for good prices. Try : http://www.freestylesalesco.com/ , for some good deals on tryouts.

[ED. note: bad news re: availability from Freestyle Sales..]
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999
From: Simbuono Guidice simbuonoguidice@hotmail.com
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu
Subject: Lubitel 166 TLR (for Medium Format Camera page)

I recently tried to order a Lubitel from FreeStyle and they said it was out of production and they no longer had it available for sale. So it looks like folks who want one are going to have to try the used market...

-Sam

From: "Harris G. Berg" sirrah@pcfl.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace
Subject: Re: Selling cameras
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1998

Depending on the condition of the equipment, about 70% of dealer selling price would be a fair price to offer merchandise for sale. In trying to sell used equipment to dealers, they will usually offer 25 to 30% of its fair market value. Hope this helps.

F. Hayashi wrote ...

>In relation to the purchase price from a place like KEH, what is a
>reasonable price for selling a camera?
>
>Should I be happy to get 70% of the purchase price for a similar item?
>Or more? Or less?
>
>| Fumitaka Hayashi      -       hayashi@u.washington.edu      |

From: "John Stewart" radiojohn@email.msn.com
Subject: Re: Seagull VS Yashicamat
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998

I DID pay about that much (or a little more) for a late (1969) Speed. Sadly, I think we'll see a new TLR before anyone makes a new 'Speed. I'm still upset that one of the bigger photo mags called those cameras "obsolete.!"

With a roll back, either a 4x5 Graphic or the smaller 2x3 can be GREAT MF cameras, offering both rangefinder focus and ground glass for times when things are not so rushed.

I wish more "want to buy my first MF" posters would consider them.

John

From: "Christopher M. Perez" chrisper@vnd.tek.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: budget medium format Re: yashica mat 124G (lens quality?)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998

Robert Monaghan wrote:

> most of us don't realize how important it is to consider the final system
> capability and costs when we start out in medium format; I know I  didn't ;-)
>
> so if you prefer a TLR, and you have only around $200, then the extra $50
> or so for a system TLR like the C220 with interchangeable lenses and a
> pro body is a longterm upgradable and extendable choice.

At various swaps I've seen the earlier C3 and C33 cameras in the $150 range. Outstanding buys for interchangable lens'd systems.

Or you could look at a Rolleiflex with a 3.5 Xenar 75mm lens for about that price too. Rolleicords with decent optics are cheaper yet. But I've found the film plane to be suspect (film buckles slightly in the center).

> one of the koni-omega 6x7 rangefinders is also a great buy in this  price
> range

Agreed.

I'll go out on a limb and say that if a person works 120 format like they do large format (4x5 or greater) they may find folding cameras from the '40's and '50's useful

Many can be found with good optics of less than $100. If they don't have a rangefinde mechanism, little Watameters or Kodak rangefinders can be found for less than $25 in man cases. So a person could build a 120 kit using lightweight folder camera (say, $50), pl a $20 Luna Pilot meter, and another $25 for rangefinder. It'd be perfectly usable for many situations.

I hope this helps.

- Chris

From Medium Format Digest:
From: Patrick Drennon sierraengineering@worldnet.att.net
Subject: Response to Budget MF: Which one, vote now
Date: 1999-01-12

Look @ Ebay.com, you'll consistently see Mamiya M645's in the $500 range (w/ prism finder and 80mm f/2.8). These are MUCH more versatile cameras than TLR's and are capable of using the newest M645 lenses from Mamiya. They do not have interchangeable backs but do share the 645 Pro's film inserts. They are also built much better (read as more durable) than the new 645's, they are cast/machined frames not plastic or composites. If you decide to expand your system or want to do macro or telephoto work you'll be glad you stayed with the SLR!

From Medium Format Digest:
From: Paul Hampton phphoto@midwest.net
Subject: Response to Budget MF: Which one, vote now
Date: 1999-01-13

I would take a STRONG look at a Rollei SLX. You get built in winder, meter, DOF preview button, German optics along with both 120 and 220 film capability. Hadley Chamberlain shows one on his web site with an 80/2.8 HFT Plannar and a charger (Exc.+++) for $695.00. He's at www.HECPHOTO.com

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: sparks@col.hp.com (John Sparks)
[1] Re: Exacta 66 madel III
Date: Wed Jan 20 1999

Steve (camera@alloymail.com) wrote:

Where can I buy a new Exacta 66 Model III ? (Besides Cambridge Camera)

I believe Adorama lists it in their recent ads. I haven't heard of anywhere else in the US that carries it. Don't know about outside the US.

John Sparks

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: lemon@lime.org (lemonade)
[1] Re: Wanted:cheap Medium Format camera
Date: Sun Feb 07 1999

eddholl@aol.com (EddHoll) wrote:

Does anyone know where I can get very cheap medium cameras, such as Lubitel's,

Lubitels, Holga's and others can be mail ordered from Freestyle. http://www.freestylesalesco.com

Seagull (a much better camera) can be mail ordered from Calumet. http://www.calumetphoto.com

--

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "Yan Chiou" yan_chiou@mail.utexas.edu
[1] Re: Seagull 4B and 4A
Date: Mon Feb 08 1999

The 4B is a Rolleicord copy, the 4A is a Rolleiflex copy. the 4A has a handcrank winder.

I was in China last year and they had 4B's for 550rmb and 4A's for around 1000rmb, or approximately $65 and $120 respectively. There is an 18k gold plated special addition 4A for around $400.

Gordon Li wrote

>Dear all,
>
>Does any one has expenience on Seagull TLR?
>What are the differences between 4B and 4A since there are
>some price different.
>
>Thks.
>
>Gordon
>
    

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: jjmcf@aol.com (JJMcF)
[1] Re: medium format for under $1,000?
Date: Wed Mar 03 1999

We could start with Agfa and Kodak folding cameras for under $5 (some of which give remarkably good results) but to avoid public scorn, consider superb Rolleiflexes that can be had for under $500; then there's the Graflex XL with all its interchangeables, (again, an outfit for under $500), or (my choice) a 2x3 press camera with Graflok back--you can do just about anything with this rig, and can get started for about $250.

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: radimus@paonline.com
[1] Re: Advice- Best inexpensive TLR?
Date: Tue Feb 23 1999

I have a Chinese TLR called a Pearl River that I picked up at a Washington DC camera show for a rediculously low price because the dealer was tired of hauling it around. It's pretty identical to the older Seagul TLR's and takes great pictures. I recently used it to do a portrait shoot at my church. The pictures came out great.

Porter's (http://www.porters.com/), Calumet Photo (http://www.calumetphoto.com/), and believe it or not Wal-Mart (http://www.wal-mart.com/) are selling the latest Chinese TLR camera. It looks like the old Rollei TLR that has a crank on the side for winding the film. Porter's and Wal-mart sell it as the Kalimar Reflex 66. Calumet sells it under the Seagul name. Prices range from $120-$190 US.

Rad

From: Adrian Ranfft ranfft@informatik.hu-berlin.de
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: inexpensive SLR - Exacta? Kiev? used Hasselblad?
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999

M. Nail schrieb:

> I'm looking to get a MF SLR, my TLR just isn't enough. I need somthing
> inexpensive, and I usually use either a wide angle or macro lens. I love
> slow films so tripod socket, mirror lock, and cable release are  necessary.
> I prefer 6X6. Any suggestions? are the Kiev or Exacta iii good? I'll be
> doing 16X20 prints, so sharp lenses are an issue also. thanks for any
> input!
>
> -- mnail@u.washington.edu --- --   

I think, the Exakta is a nice camera but very expensive. Right, there is a AE-Prism avaiable but the price. It's not a Hassy but expensive too. The Kiev is a russian camera what would say enough. But there are some resellers in Germany that test the cameras an build in a cloth shutter and cloth interrior, a mirror lock-up and if you want a C-bayonett (Pentacon SIX, KIEV 60, Exakta 66) so you can use the fine Carl Zeiss Jena and Schneider lenses. Mail me, if you are interested in the adresses of the resellers. Another camera would be the Pentaxon SIX TL which you only can buy on the second hand market. It is big, heavy and old, but it works and you get excelent images. Just think about this one.

Prices in Germany (all second hand)
Kiev 88 TTL                          400$
Kiev 88 TTL cloth int. .. C bay.     800-900$  (NEW!!)
Exakta 66 III                       1500-2000$
Pentacon SIX TL                      200$

Adrian

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: wkato@aol.com (WKato)
[1] Re: Inexpensive mf slr
Date: Wed Mar 17 1999

Go to KEH and buy a M645 J and 80/2.8 for $179 and $131, respectively. The total would be $312 and you would have some guarantee that it works.

Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000
From: "David Foy" dfoy@marketactics.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: TLR Quest

The least expensive option is probably a Yashica-Mat (plain vanilla, not 12, 24, 124, 124-G), either unmetered or with a silicon meter (model EM or LM). They're fine, sturdy cameras capable of the best possible work.

Moving up from that in price and quality, a Rolleicord with Xenar lens, preferably a Va or Vb model (they're the latest and most likely to have a lot of years left in them). Ditto a Yashica-mat 12, 124, or 124-G -- fine cameras but pricier than plain vanilla and no significant advantages over it.

In your price range a good Rolleiflex is not impossible to find, but a little unlikely. Under $200 they're typically quite old, often well-used over a couple of decades by a pro, so a newer Yashica-Mat or Rolleicord is a much better deal. You might find one with a Tessar, Xenar, Xenon or Planar lens in your price range. If so, and it's in good, low-mileage condition, grab it.

Keep your eyes peeled for a Minolta Autocord or a Ricoh Diacord. They are much less plentiful than Yashica or Rollei TLRs and can be pricey, but are often available well within your price range.

Avoid the various early Yashica TLRs with Yashimar or Yashikor lenses, Rolleicords with Triotar lenses, and the various Seagulls, Lubitels, Voigtlanders, the unknowables like Wardflex, Beautyflex, etc. They're capable of good work and do not deserve to be looked down on, but for what you're willing to spend you can do much better.

Lastly, consider whether or not interchangeable lenses will be useful for you, and if so go for any Mamiya TLR body, including the ancient but wonderful (and light) original Mamiyaflex, which can often be found for peanuts. Don't worry about getting a newer, upgraded C220 or C330 pro body with lots of features, because they aren't that important except to pros cranking through a dozen rolls a day on everything from weddings and portraits to copying and product photography. Then spend your leftover dough on lenses for it.

Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999
From: "Nicholas O. Lindan" nolindan@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Kiev 88

sheldon_hambrick@hotmail.com wrote:

>> medium format in the $500-$600 price range?
> Mamyia TLR and one (or two if you're lucky) lenses.

Mamiya Universal/Press/23 with 3 lenses
Mamiya C22 with 2-3 lenses
Graflex 2x3 with 3 lenses
Koni-Omega with 2-3 lenses
2 Zeiss Ikontas
A selection of 10-20 Zeiss Nettars
40 Holgas
15 Lubitels
10 Seagulls
4 Yashica 124 G's
5 Minolta Autocords

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio nolindan@ix.netcom.com

Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999
From: tom_harvey@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: hidden bargains Re: Looking for the First cheap Medium-Format

rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan) wrote:

> Hmmm. See http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/budget.html and mf/cameras.html

Bob,

Nice to see your reply. The above -- "see http:// . . . " is great advice. A wonderful site full of information. Many thanks for your work putting it together and maintaining it.

About a year ago, I started a similar search -- how to move up to medium format on a budget. I have tried several folding cameras, but generally find that the peephole viewfinders and (usually) lack of a rangefinder to be frustrating. But I have not given up on them, if only to have a easily carried MF camera.

I bought a near mint Minolta Autocord (no meter) on eBay for $125 and really like it. I cannot speak to the other twin lens options, but the Autocord is a fine camera and certainly has its experienced supporters out there.

My favorite, however, is a Koni-Omega Rapid M. In side-by-side comparisons, the 90mm lens is better than my Autocord lens. The Perez/ Thalmann MF lens tests (Bob mentions the url below) bear out the quality of the Koni-Omega lenses. I like the rangefinder and eye-level operation more, and I prefer the 6x7 format. A selection of lenses -- albeit narrow, but plenty for me -- is an added bonus, as is mid-roll film magazine interchangeability and 120/220 back options. There is even an on-line copy of the manual that can be found at Bob's MF list referenced above.

I have used eBay extensively, though not exclusively, in my quest for cameras. While I agree with observers about what seem to be high prices (i.e., more than I really want to pay), eBay has allowed me to obtain and try cameras I may never see otherwise. I have been able to buy slightly low (at times) and sell slightly high (at other times) and come out more-or-less even. That is, I have tried several options, made side-by-side, sold what I no longer wanted, and have not lost money due to "depreciation." Rec.photo.marketplace has been useful, and of course camera stores and shows. There, even when I may not find the right camera in the right condition and/or at the right price, I have been able to handle a range of options and leran a lot by talking to people.

My time spent doing all of this is another issue -- is it a hobby or an incredibly "low hourly wage" effort? Perahps I should have just gone out and bought a Fuji GW670III from a dealer! I have also found (though perhaps I have been particularly unlucky) that way too often cameras bought sight-unseen have more serious problems than I have been led to expect: lenses that are not clear, sticky shutters, etc. I have always been able to reach satisfactory agreements with the sellers, but the waste of time is frustrating.

All of our contributions of advice, of course, can only suggest ideas. Camera types and styles -- and then models -- are too complex when mixed with personal issues (such as wearing glasses or not), taste in things like film format, built-in metering, etc. And probably too few of us offering our insights have really tried an adequate range of cameras. I'm still learning, but by keeping the Autocord and the Koni-Omega system, I've run out of money for exploring!

Best of luck to all in their searches -- and their photography!

Tom

> There are lots of minolta autocords and ricoh TlRs that are also very
> good buys and undervalued, IMHO. Conversely, you can often buy a Bronica
> C or C2 SLR with nikkor interchangeable lens (75mm) (non-intechangeable
> back but film inserts) for $250 - and I just bought a Bronica EC with
> 75mm nikkor and magazine with electronic shutter control and
> interchangeable film back (12/24) for $350 - from a dealer with warranties!
>
> Many folks go with the TLRs because they think they are low cost and they
> can't afford a 6x6 SLR, when there are SLRs out there for not much more
> than many folks pay for their yashicamat 124Gs. You can even buy a new
> Kiev-88 camera outfit with 6x6 back and lens for $350 or so with
> warranties. Similarly, there are press cameras with great optics such as
> the koni-omegas which sell for less than $350 on the used market.
>
> So I think that there are a lot more medium format bargains out there,
> and the usual perception that bargain medium format means TLR is wrong.
> TLRs are great camera options for some users, but if you really want an
> interchangeable lens, backs, and viewfinder camera, you can get it new
> (Kiev) or used (Bronica) for $250-350. If you want a leaf shutter
> rangefinder, you have low end choices too (KO rapid.. and mamiya
> universal etc.) that are also in this ultra-budget price range, in 6x7
> and 6x9 formats, again around $350 and up.
>
> In short, I think many folks push the TLRs as an entry level budget
> medium format system when there are many options in SLR and press or
> rangefinder cameras out there for modest prices too.
>
> As for a low end $25 budget MF option, see Chris Perez's notes at:
> http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/bw/house.html - be prepared for a surprise! ;-)
> (Chris Perez and Mr. Thalmann did a lot of lens testing of LF and MF lenses,
> only to find some incredible bargains including the ones he describes at URL)
>
> grins bobm

[ed. note: the above bw/house.html page has been dropped... sorry! but see Kodak 620 Special (Chris Perez, on low $$ high resolution camera) - 04/2000]

Date: 12 Aug 1999
From: rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: hidden bargains Re: Looking for the First cheap Medium-Format

Hmmm. See http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/budget.html and mf/cameras.html

also my TLRs page at mf/tlr.html for some comments on why earlier Yashica models may actually be better than the later 124G models, plus a lot cheaper There are a lot of hidden TLR bargains out there most folks never hear about

I think that the reason yashicamat 124Gs have such a high rep is that they are about the last production non-interchangeable TLR in the West/Japan (1989 or so?), and lots were on store shelves at closeout prices ($75-100+) which lead to articles on medium format using them as the "best buy" in a TLR in the early 90s, which have been repeated to become conventional wisdom ;-)

Unfortunately, buyers reading those articles have bid up the prices of the yashicamat 124Gs to untenable price points. You can get a rolleicord or even a mamiyaflex C2/C3 or C22/C33 interchangeable lens TLR for roughly what the 124Gs are sometimes sold for. There are indications that the earlier model Yashicas had better mechanics and perhaps optics than the end of the line models (e.g., plastic parts in gears in last production runs)

There are lots of minolta autocords and ricoh TlRs that are also very good buys and undervalued, IMHO. Conversely, you can often buy a Bronica C or C2 SLR with nikkor interchangeable lens (75mm) (non-intechangeable back but film inserts) for $250 - and I just bought a Bronica EC with 75mm nikkor and magazine with electronic shutter control and interchangeable film back (12/24) for $350 - from a dealer with warranties!

Many folks go with the TLRs because they think they are low cost and they can't afford a 6x6 SLR, when there are SLRs out there for not much more than many folks pay for their yashicamat 124Gs. You can even buy a new Kiev-88 camera outfit with 6x6 back and lens for $350 or so with warranties. Similarly, there are press cameras with great optics such as the koni-omegas which sell for less than $350 on the used market.

So I think that there are a lot more medium format bargains out there, and the usual perception that bargain medium format means TLR is wrong. TLRs are great camera options for some users, but if you really want an interchangeable lens, backs, and viewfinder camera, you can get it new (Kiev) or used (Bronica) for $250-350. If you want a leaf shutter rangefinder, you have low end choices too (KO rapid.. and mamiya universal etc.) that are also in this ultra-budget price range, in 6x7 and 6x9 formats, again around $350 and up.

In short, I think many folks push the TLRs as an entry level budget medium format system when there are many options in SLR and press or rangefinder cameras out there for modest prices too.

As for a low end $25 budget MF option, see Chris Perez's notes at: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/bw/house.html - be prepared for a surprise! ;-) (Chris Perez and Mr. Thalmann did a lot of lens testing of LF and MF lenses, only to find some incredible bargains including the ones he describes at URL)

grins bobm

[Ed. note: importance of overall system costs emphasized...]
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999
From: "Robert G. Welch" rwelch@cruzio.com
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: WHICH HASSY TO BUY

I made the switch from a Bronica ETRSi system to a Hassy 500c/m and have never been sure it was worth it, from a finacial point of view at least. Yes the resale value is higher, but if you don't intend to resale your equipment then what does that matter. One negative is that any accessories I need are almost as expensive used as they are new. Basically I could afford 3-4 complete used Bronica systems (i.e. body + 3 lenses + 2 backs + finder) for the cost of one used Hasselblad system (the basic 500 series kit isn't so bad, but after that $$$), which means having a backup body and lens is an even bigger deal. As for repair cost, I can buy another Bronica lens for what it cost to repair a Hasselblad lens (believe me, I know)!

Would I go back to Bronica (or Mamiya, or Pentax)? Probably not now that I have the Hasselblad and have built up a usable system with it, and I won't argue that the Bronica is a better camera--although in competent hands I believe most photos could be hard to tell apart, at least I haven't noticed a significant difference. Would I make the switch to Hassey again if I had it to do over? Probably not-- I might argue that a used Bronica is a better value as a 'user' system (as opposed to a finacial investment) and I'd use the extra money for film and processing instead!

That said, I'll add that I'm happy with the Hasselblad and I don't want to look back, but I could have been content with the Bronica had I known what I know now. Personally, I wish there were more people buying other cameras so that the used market on Hassey equipment would come down to earth.

My .02,
Robert

Bernard wrote:

> Although there is no argument that Hassy is expensive, it also has a
> remarkably high resale value. Therefore, if you can invest the capital,
> it may turn out to be cheaper to work with Hassy than with some other
> brands.
>
> Bernard.

Date: 25 Apr 1999
From: pixdan@aol.com (PixDan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Opinions sought: USA Kiev 88 vs. older camera

Greg,

Having owned Koni-Omega, Mamiya Press, and having started with Yashica-Mat 124 over 30-Yrs. ago, I would recommend the Mamiya C-330S. (the last version before they discontinued the line) Lots of them around at real reasonable prices , Good quality Lenses,and best of all Leaf- Shutter Lenses so you can Fill-in Flash @ any Shutter Speed.

(You may not use this technique now but if you start, leaf-shutter lenses save you tons of grief compared to Focal-Plane Shutters) The Kiev is a Focal-Plane Shutter Camera. I only know 2-People with Kiev's and both got rid of them within a year. (Problems with Image Quality according to them)

Another thing to consider is that like your Yashica-Mat, the C-330 will allow you to see when someone Blinks during a photo because there is no mirror comming up & blocking the Lens during exposure. This makes a huge difference on People Pix like Weddings.

The C-330S is also one of the Easiest to Focus Cameras I have ever purchased. Very bright Screen,and you can us it waist- level like your Yashica or put the latest Prism on it for the easiest use, but more weight. Another advantage, it takes 120 & 220 Film without separate backs.

I have 2-C-330S's /3- Hasselblad CM's/4 or 5 Mamiya RB-67Pro-S's and a full compliment of lenses for all systems, and I can honestly say I can Load, Focus, and Shoot faster & easier with a C-330S than anything I own for Candid Work, like the Weddings I do. (At least 60 per Year)

How's that for an endorsement?

Any other questions feel free to e-Mail me PixDan@AOL.com

Dan
Karr Photographic
Detroit MI.

Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000
From: wzhang1@my-deja.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: What is the most good M.F. within 500$ ?

Non-SLRs:
Rolleiflex (you can get an excellent condition 2.8C for less than $400,
as well as Rollei MX-EVS model)
Mamiya C220 or C330 or C33 (the only three models I like).
Kiev 60 and Kiev 88 (I don't highly recomment the 88 though).
Koni Omega, very sharp optics!
Yashica TLRs (D, MAT, 124G...)
Seagull TLRs

SLRs:
Bronica S2A (I had hard time to focus... but may work for you)
Bronica ETR with $50 more (for total $550).
Mamiya M645J (if you can find one)

*All I mentioned were setups which is ready to shoot, not just bodies.

Good luck!

W.

Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000
From: greg kerr greg@on.aibn.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Rolleiflex TLR 2.8 Planar vs. Hasselblad 80mm T*

ShadCat11 wrote:

> I have owned Yashicamat, Hasselblad and Rolleiflex, several samples of each.
> As a camera, I consider the Y'mat to be a POS, but as for picture results, I am
> hard pressed to tell the difference at f11-16.

Thanks for the post. This is exactly my point. I've never claimed for one second that the 124G was a better or even as good a camera as a Rolleiflex or Blad, at least not in terms of build quality, but will state that under certain conditions it can take just as good a picture. We've both proved it. Recently I picked up an old 35mm Konica auto S2 rangefinder on ebay for $36.00. I posted on the 35mm ng about it and received a reply from a Leica owner who claimed that under the right settings his S2 could match his Leica. There are a lot of people in this world who automatically assume that by spending more money they will always get better performance. That's just not always the case.

Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000
From: "M P Brennan" mpbrennan@xoommail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Best MF under USD 1000 ?

For a thousand bucks, you can get a nice Hasselblad 500CM with 80mm/2.8 chrome lens and 12 exposure back and have close to enough left over to buy a used 2X converter to get your normal lens to portrait length. I would recommend this option.

If you want more bang for your buck, buy an older Mamiya M645 (645, 645J, 645-1000s)(body and insert- about $300), non-metered prism ($200), adapter to use Pentacon lenses ($35 from Kiev Camera) and some Ukrainian glass from Kiev Camera (kievcamera.com in Atlanta, GA). At roughly $200 a pop, you can get any focal length you want and have pretty darned good glass to show for it.

For $1000, your kit could include 80mm, 120mm (or 150mm) and the wonderful 30mm fisheye.

The only disadvantage to using the adapter is that you have to manually stop down your aperture before you take the shot, but that is a small inconvenience.

Mike

...

Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000
From: "Kerry L. Thalmann" K.Thalmann@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Best MF under USD 1000 ?

> Now, I am looking forward to entering into MF world.
> Would you recommand best MF within USD 1000 for me?
> Many thanks
>
> whkye

You might consider a Bronica GS-1 system. It's very expensive new, but has a horrible resale value (good if you're buying, but bad if you're selling). I'm in the process of assembling a GS-1 system and I've been able to find most items in near mint to unused condition for 30 - 35% of the new discount prices.

It's over your $1000 limt by 50%, but there is currently a GS-1 outfit up for bid on eBay for $1500 that includes the body, AE prism finder two 120 backs, 100mm lens, filters, etc. The auction ends tomorrow, there is no reserve and currently no bidders (I have nothing to do with this auction, and am passing this information along as a data point on used GS-1 pricing only). Not counting the filters and other small accessories, this outfit new sells for over $5200 at B&H.;

If you're willing to go with a standard (non-AE) prism or waist level finder and a single roll film back, you can probably find something in the $1000 range if you shop around. Even from dealers, I see such outfits with ASKING prices in the $1200 - $1300 range (check the KEH and Midwest Photo Exchange web sites). I"ve noticed KEH has been lowering their prices on used GS-1 gear every week or two on items than haven't sold. Currently, GS-1 items in their LN- condition are priced at about 40 - 45% of new. GS-1 items in their exc. condition are in the 32 - 40% range. Used lens prices are in the $375 (what I paid for an unused 100mm) to $750 range (I paid $690 for a used but near mint 50mm) with the 65mm and 150mm falling in the middle, the 200 near the upper end).

The GS-1 is a full system camera SLR camera with a number of finders (waist level, prism, AE prism, rotary AE prism with spot meter), backs (120 and 220 in 645, 6x6 and 6x7) and lenses from 50mm - 500mm (but the 500mm is way expensive, heavy and rare). Best of all, it gives you a nice big 6x7 image size with the convenience of a SLR in a reasonably compact and portable package. With slightly used items selling for under 50% of new from major dealers and prices in the 30 - 35% range on eBay, it is certainly a buyers market. Just don't consider it a great investment if you want to sell it a year or two down the road and hope to make a profit. If, you want to buy the system to use it for several years, I think it's a hard to beat combo at current used prices.

You didn't mention you intended use of the camera. I shoot landscapes with the camera mounted on a tripod. So how the camera handles handheld and works with a flash are not important to me (although I've heard the Bronica is fine for these situations). My assessment of the GS-1 system is based on my needs and application. If you intend to shoot weddings or other handheld candids, a 6x6 or 645 SLR may be a better match for such applications. There are pleny of used Mamiyas and Bronicas on the market in these formats that would make good starter outfits with plenty of room to grow.

Kerry
--
Kerry L. Thalmann Large Format Images of Nature
A Few of My Images Online at: http://www.thalmann.com/

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "Leen Koper" leenkoper@zeelandnet.nl
[1] Re: Rollei & Hasselblad
Date: Sun Nov 19 2000

I've been using professionally both Hasselblad and Rollei. I always found the Hassy rather poor in ergonomics. The Rollei was much more fun.

But now I use -still professionally- a Bronica SQ-B and a Mamiya 645 Pro for less than half the price of H or R equipment and I cannot tell the difference in the final results.

So I am happy with what I've got now and for the price difference? I don't remember aany more what happened with the money I saved.....

Leen

....

Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000
From: "Art Begun" beguna@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Buying a Yashica 124G: Mamiya

Didn't mean to confuse but the deals are not quite that good. 645J with waist viewfinder often sells under $100 with insert (worth $50). I bought a mint one for $125 off ebay and felt so guilty I asked the lady if she wanted it back and she said yes so I sold it back to her for the same price. AE prism (the one with coupling) I've seen as low as $170. The 645J is just about the same as the 1000s with a slower top shutter speed and I think it might be missing mirror lockup. As far as reliablility, you would be hard pressed to find a broken one. They last forever. The AE prism can develop a line in it though which does not show up in pictures. If you go to Mamiya's site, you can follow their forum that includes discussions on it. Don't get confused on prisms though. THere are at least 4. Non-metered, cds (PD), PDS (same as cds but better cell), and the best one is the AE because it is fully coupled. You can pick out the AE because it has only an asa dial and on off switch. If the prism has a shutter dial you don't want it because its not coupled. People often advertise the cds uncoupled prisms as AE prisms. Don't buy one by mistake unless you don't mind manual settings.

Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000
From: "Art Begun" beguna@mindspring.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Buying a Yashica 124G: Mamiya

I noted the higher shutter speed and the mirror lock? What else is it missing. I've seen mint j's go for $100. Comparable 1000s go for $250+. That might be significant for someone on a budget and just experimenting with medium format. In either case, the real cost will probably be close to zero. Someone could buy one, use it for many months and probably re-sell it at the same price.

Date: Fri, 5 Jan 200
From: "M P Brennan" mpbrennan@hotmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
References: <934lf8$5h9$1@newsflood.osaka.att.ne.jp
Subject: Re: Med Format on a budget

My standard recommendation for a cheap/reliable/quality intro to MF is:

1) Mamiya M645 or M645-1000S body (about $300 including film insert and prism on eBay- don't bother with an M645J)

2) Kaleiner (Ukrainian) 150mm/2.8 lens with Pentacon 6 mount ($190 from kievcamera.com)

3) Pentacon 6 to Mamiya adapter ($25 from kievcamera.com if you buy it with the lens)

You will get a very reliable SLR camera with film inserts you can preload and quickly change (during a wedding shoot, for instance) and high quality optics at an incredibly low price.

One nice thing is that if you eventually upgrade your equipment to a Mamiya 645 Super or Pro you can keep using the same film inserts and lenses that you accumulated for the M645. The prism and crank are the only things that won't fit the newer cameras.

The only thing you give up by using the Ukrainian lenses (with adapter) is the auto stop-down of the diaphragm (which is no big deal). Open the lens all the way up to 2.8 for focussing and then remember to turn it down to the proper f/stop for the exposure. Mikail Fourman (kievcamera) told me that he thinks that the Kiev plant will start producing lenses with Mamiya mounts on them some time this year. This would mean that you could use the Ukrainian lenses without an adapter and retain auto stop-down.

In the mean time, I have found that for anything down to f/8 I've got plenty of light to focus, so I usually don't bother to keep opening it back up between exposures.

One afternoon of trying out the Arsat 30mm fisheye ($190 from kievcamera.com) on your camera and you'll be hooked.

-Mike

From: "Wayne D" wdewitt@snip.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001
Subject: Re: from RB67 to HAsselblad ?

Depends on your use. With the Mamiya the bellows comes in real handy for close focusing, the rotating rectangular format reduces waste if that's the way you see the world, and you can generally afford a wider range of lenses if you're on a budget. The Hasselblad offers greater portability and through the lens auto flash with some models. As far as the end result the Mamiya obviously has the advantage as far as film area is concerned. As for lens quality it varies enough between each individual sample that unless you test and hand pick your lenses you can't claim an advantage for either lens line. I had an RB for 15 years. The 50mm and 250mm lenses that I had were spectacular, and the 90mm was very good, but the 140mm macro was mediocre at best. Your mileage may vary.

"shane mcdonald" shane28@capital.net wrote

> HI
>
> Need some input,  Any out there?
> Just got a Hasselblad 501c after using the RB 67 for some time and I am
> amazed at the quality and smoothness of the Hassy. Haven't done any 16
> by 20's yet , can you tell me if there will be any disadvantages to
> blowing up 6 by 6
> over 6 by 7 ?
> What can I look forward to ?    ( 80 2.8 cf lens )
> I think I will retire the RB after using this camera.
> Any reason not to?
>
> appreciate any advice and thanks in advance.
>
> shane

Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001
From: nimages@capecod.net (David Grabowski)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: from RB67 to HAsselblad ?

shane mcdonald shane28@capital.net wrote:

>HI
>
>Need some input,  Any out there?
>Just got a Hasselblad 501c after using the RB 67 for some time and I am
>amazed at the quality and smoothness of the Hassy. Haven't done any 16
>by 20's yet , can you tell me if there will be any disadvantages to
>blowing up 6 by 6
>over 6 by 7 ?
>What can I look forward to ?    ( 80 2.8 cf lens )
>I think I will retire the RB after using this camera.
>Any reason not to?
>
>appreciate any advice and thanks in advance.
>
>shane

I don't shoot Hassy but I do shoot square and also use the RB. What you are looking at is two different schools of thought from my view anyway. With the larger and rectangular format you compose and print what you see in the viewer, the way you set it up in the viewer. With square you either make square prints or you imagine somewhat how the the rectangle would be cropped from the square , leaving room at the time of composition to do so.

Beyond that, they are two different sytems as well, I personally find the Mamiya very handy in the studio and with formally posed family shots outdoors. Square format I think has the advantage in wedding or events coverage , where you can almost not worry about composition in terms of square or rectangle and crop later to horizontal, vertical or leave it square for the smaller 5x5s in an album. I find square to lay out very well in an album situation and it has a bit more impact than the smaller 4x5s do . Square to me says something more in proofing than the little 4x5s do but that's probably just my own little twist on all this.

If you are enlarging to 16x20 you probably won't see much difference between sytems from the same film , in using crop cards to set negatives in, the 6x7 is a dream to setup and it gives that extra insurance that a good quality print will probably turn out from it. In practical terms though, (we have cropped either quite a bit) either format will return very good enlargements up to about the size you mention, after that the 6x7 takes over for sure as long as you can adhere to something close to the full negative size. Also just as coming in from 35mm. to any medium format , the move from cropped 6x6 which yields about a 645 neg., you will notice a difference with faster films, you will be able to do more with fast films with the larger system , it's just a given though not as large a difference as from 35mm..

You probably should hang onto the Mamiya for a while yet, let the bliss get over with and make a rational decision in a few months as to how you want to continue. You may find there are certain types of shots that work better for you with the RB, or may find it's just a waste to have around and the hassy has taken over for real.Right now it's natural that you would be hog wild over the newest system and being Hassy I'm sure is giving extra value to that feeling.

David Grabowski

From: bobhickey@webtv.net (Bob Hickey)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001
Subject: Re: Leica Conversion?

I don't see why not. Seems to be, a Leica can be used to death and then sold back on E-bay with very little loss. Since I have lost count of my cameras, 30-35 when last I looked, and the only ones I use are the 6x6s, and sometimes the R3 for color, I'll be selling off most of my stuff soon and probably get an M3 or 4. As it is, all I do is dust most of them off and buy new batteries anyway. That's the trouble with 35s; the day after you buy one, you need this, that and the other thing. Ther're built obsolete. With a 6x6, a couple of filters and a metal shade, that's it for another decade. I once found a nice Pentax M something in a pawn shop that took outstanding pictures and fit in my jacket pocket. Perfect. So I put a motor and a wide range zoom on it, and it became just about un-usable. Gave it away. That's when I re-thought the whole process. Now it's most often a Rollei on a stick, with a meter in my pocket. Much better results.

Bob Hickey

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: flexaret2@aol.com (FLEXARET2)
Date: Fri Feb 16 2001
[1] Re: step-up to MF (pentacon 6...?)

My best advice for starting in medium format is to get a good quality early (1949 to 1955) model Rolleiflex TLR in good condition with a clean, unscratched Tessar lens. These can be obtained for $100 to $250 depending on condition and who is selling it.

This is a pro grade camera and photos taken with these models were heavily used in national magazines. This is a good start and experience will move on from there.

[Ed. note: another vote for low entry Rollei Automat TLR...]
From Rollei Mailing List:
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001
From: Gene Johnson genej2@home.com
Subject: Re: [Rollei] Re: To Charge Our Batteries

Hi Jon,

I'm seeing Automats on eBay for under $150 all the time. I love mine. They seem like pretty sturdy beasts so your chances of finding a good user are pretty fair I think. Mine has the Zeiss Opton Tessar and I'm totally impressed by it.

Gene

From: fiskeytwo@aol.com (FiskeyTwo)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 24 Feb 2001
Subject: Re: Advice for MF first camera please...

There are many choices for medium format as you have already seen. You should first decide what versatility you need to have now and how much you may want in the future. Ideas to consider are:

TLR's w/Fixed Lens - Yashica 124G and D models offer good value and good reliability at low cost. The 124G has a meter, the D does not. Good to begin with because the cost is minimal and they are easy to find and not too expensive. (The Rolleiflexes are great but very expensive.)

TLR's w/Changeable Lenses - The Mamiya C330's are great and the lenses are plentiful. Depending on your market place, the cost of the lenses may or may not be as good a bargin as those for some SLR's.

SLR's 645 - The Mamiya 645 series is probaly the most plentiful and most used 645 format. Lenses and accessories are readily available and very reasonable. More bargins can be had with this brand than most others. Reliability is excellent. The other brands are also quite good but it is harder to find good bargins on used equipment. Most of these (Mamiyas and such) can be bought with one or two lenses and used for years that way, or you can expand into a larger system quite easily. The Pentax 645 has all the bells and whistles that 35mm cameras have, the others do not but are still quite useful for a thinking photographer.)

SLR's 6x6 - Hasselblad is the cadillac here, with equipment readily available all over the world. Prices can be high and thus make it a serious users model.

(You will always get your money back out of it if you buy used at good prices.) Other brands are available too at lower cost and can be just as useful.

645 vs 6x6 - 645 gives you ~15 shots per roll of 120 film with a 41-42mm x 56 mm negative. 6x6 gives 12 shots per roll with 56x56mm negatives, which crop down for rectangular prints. With the 6x6 the camera stays level and you crop when printing for vertical or horizantal format. With the 645's you have to turn the camera when taking the pictures.

Rangefinders and Others - The 645 and 6x6 rangefinders are nice and can be handy. The newer ones with interchangeable lenses are great but expensive. The older ones can be good too but usually have fixed lenses. The older ones may have a reliability problem simply due to their age and usage. The Mamiya Univeral Press has interchageable lenses and interchangeable film backs (for 6x6, 6x7 and Poloroid) but it is big and a bit clumsy (but I love and use mine a lot.)

6x7 - The Pentax 6x7 or 67 is great and easy to use, but it has a very slow shutter flash speed of 1/30. Great for big negatives and very sharp lenses.

I use:

645 - Mamiya 645's (originals w/ 7 lenses)
6x6 - Yashica D, 635, and 124G
Rangefinder - Universal Press w/ 3 lenses)

Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001
From: "M P Brennan" mpbrennan@hotmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya question

cc_photo@mtnguy.com wrote

> A person at work has a Mamiya 645 1000s they want to sell. It has an
> 80mm lens, a 120 film insert and a carrying case. I have no idea what
> it's worth.  Can I please get some comments on this particular camera  and maybe a
> round about price of what it might be worth?

A 1000S w/80mm, 120 Insert and Metered prism can be had for around $400 on eBay if you're patient. $450 to $475 if you're in a bigger hurry.

> Also, shooting scenics, is a 6x4.5 format a good choice or should I hold out until I can
> afford a larger format (6x6 or 6x7) camera?

I shoot 6x4.5 and 6x6 and like both. While there are strong arguments to be made for the larger format cameras, 6x4.5 is still 250% larger than 35mm. That is a substantial amount that seems to be readily dismissed by the 6x7 guys. The 1000S is comfortable to hold, gets 30 shots on a roll of 220 and has leaf shutter lenses available if you need to sych at above 1/60th.

Something else to consider if you will be doing flash photography is that most of the focal plane 6x7 cameras only have a 1/30th synch. There's not much you can do to escape pure physics.

If you like the Mamiya 645 camera, don't let anyone talk you out of it.

-Mike

Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 
From: Stan McQueen <stan@smcqueen.com>
To: medium-format@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [medium-format] Holga plastic 120 camera...

>...for entering medium format on a
>shoestring budget? After all I plan to get a Leica way before I get a
>Hassy.
>
>sincerely,
>Alfie

The only thing the Holga has in common with medium format photography is
that it uses 120 film. It is a plastic toy camera that often leaks light
and has next to no exposure control. It will teach you virtually nothing
about medium format photography. Many people use the Holga and Diana--a
similar camera which is no longer produced--for "artistic" purposes,
capitalizing on the fuzzy, foggy characteristics of the camera. I have one
of the Holgas, but unfortunately, it doesn't leak enough light to look
really "artsy".

For a way to really learn about medium photography, you could try to find
an inexpensive camera on eBay. You can often get Yashica Mat 6x6 twin lens 
reflex cameras for reasonable prices--if you don't go for the
top-of-the-line Yashica Mat 124G. This was the first "real" camera I owned,
some 40 years ago and I just sold a Yashica Mat LM on eBay for less than
$175. If you don't like the thought of trying to compose using a
mirror-image, another approach is to look at the Koni-Omega rangefinder
cameras. These have an image size of 6x7 and excellent optics. They are
also available on eBay for reasonable prices. The Rapid M, Rapid 100, and
Rapid 200 models have removable film magazines that allow changing film
mid-roll. I have two of them and love them. They should cost about the same
as the Yashicas, depending on condition, accessories,and model.

You will need to find a lab that will process 120 film (you can develop the
black and white yourself) because the one-hour labs and drugstores don't
generally take that size of film. Also, you will have to decide how to make
prints. Enlargers that take medium format sizes can be expensive. I have an
Epson 1640SU scanner with a transparency adapter that I use to scan the
negatives or slides. I can then print them on one of my photo printers or 
put them on my website. For me, that was more cost-effective than building
a darkroom. You don't need a darkroom to develop the black and white film.

Stan
Photography by Stan McQueen: http://www.smcqueen.com 

Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2001 
From: Steve Gangi <sgangi@hotmail.com>
To: medium-format@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [medium-format] Re: Holga plastic 120 camera...

> I'm considering doing some legit 120 medium photography in addition
> to my SLR photography and sometimes P and S photography which I am
> definitely experiencing :)
>
> Does anyone have any ideas about whether the Holga Plastic 120 camera

For a shoestring budget, you would be better off with a used TLR for
starters. The Minolta Autocords were very good, as were the Yashica
MATs (like the D, LM, 12, etc). Avoid the MAT124G as it is currently
overpriced, as are some Rolleis. If you prefer an SLR and
interchangeable lenses, the Bronicas and Hasselblads are excellent,
but you pay much more. Some old folders are still very nice, but the
best ones are getting pricy now, and the bellows are sometimes no 
good. I suggest a twin lens reflex (TLR) for now.

From: "Eugene A. Pallat" eapallat@apk.net>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: should i get 500CM or SQ-Ai?
Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2001 

Pittas Marios wrote:

> Some people I have talked to claim they can tell the sharpness of the
> Zeiss lenses. Some others I have talked to went as far as saying that
> they challenged Hassy representaives to compare a picture with a
> Mamiya 7 vs one with a Hassy (without telling them which is which) and
> even the Hassy reps could not tell which is which.
>
> See, it makes it so easy for you now to decide!
>
> So you need to decide for yourself. Put two rolls of film in each
> magazine, shoot them completely on the spot, give them to a good lab
> straight away, and put them under the loupe (I am sure most
> used-camera shops would allow you to do that).
>
> If you can tell the difference buy the Hassy, if not buy the Bronica!

Much also depends upon the photographer.  How criticaly do you focus?  Do you use a tripod, cable release, and mirror lockup?  What are the lighting conditions and how does it affect the contrast?  Are you viewing the negatives through a quality loupe or was a condenser or diffusion enlarger used?  They both have equal sharpness, but the *percieved* sharpness of a condenser enlarger should be considered.  The quality of the enlarger lens is also a consideration.

My opinion, FWTW, is that you should get a camera which is easier and more
comfortable for *you* to use.  If the Bronica's price enables you to buy 1 or 2
more lenses, go for it!  I used to have a Bronica and I made 40x50s from it.

Unless you consistantly make prints larger than 16x20's you'll be hard pressed to tell the difference, if any.

Gene Pallat


To: medium-format@yahoogroups.com
From: flexaret@sprynet.com
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 
Subject: [medium-format] Medium Format - Problems and Solutions

I think it was Ivor Matanle who stated in one of his books, that as a focal
plane shutter gets larger so are the chances of it not working properly.

I think this is completely true with the exception of old 4x5 Graflex
reflexes which have one long shutter curtain  with many built in metal slits. Of the standard two curtain shutters it is completely true.

Of older cameras with focal plane shutters, more 35MM cameras will be found
to work properly (percentage-wise) than old 6x6cm SLRs with similar shutters. And of old large format 4x5 etc. cameras (excepting Graflex), with focal plane shutters, most do not work at all today unless they have been overhauled.

Based on this, in my responding to the post about starting in medium format,
I think the most versatile medium format cameras are 6x6cm focal plane shutter SLRs, rather than leaf shutter cameras, TLRs, 4.5x6 cameras etc.

The SLR allows viewing the exact image on the screen and 6x6cm format allows
full cropping to 4.5x6 or any other size one wants. Having a focal plane shutter allows a wide variety of less expsneive lenses and the ability to adapt any type of lens to the camera for special uses.

Older models of these types of cameras may need service to clean and lube
and tune up speeds. The best choice would be to get a new camera under warranty.

However, if one can live without the SLR features and interchangeable lenses
- the really best choice may be a standard Rolleiflex TLR - from 1952 on - with at least a f3.5 Zeiss Tessar or Schneider Xenar lens- going up to the better f2.8 Xenotar and Planar models.  From the least expensive versions and up - these can  start at $100.  The cameras have steel wind gears and Rolleiflexes will still be working when all other cameras are long left in the dust.

Using a Rellei TLR is also an experience in medium format/waist level
"seeing" and teaches as much about composition as the using of equipment.

- Sam Sherman


From: "Neurula [Sydney]" intelligence@!!!technologist.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Getting into MF?
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 

Well since you are posting this on a MF NG, the answer shouldnt surprise you
neither should you think that we are biased in saying this: MF all the
way!!!

with the relatively larger neg size, you will find it more "forgiving" for
darkroom work, dusts&scratches; won't be as obvious, bigger so much easier to
view before you make the enlargements.

Since you are doing your own development, the higher cost associated with
lab processing MF films wont affect you, however make sure that the
enlargers at your college can accomodate the larger negs though.

For what its worth, I am a newbie too and ive been doing my own research for
the past few months, ive just bought a Rollei and waiting for it to be sent
to me. I think your situation is very similar to mine, being a college
student too (except that im not taking photo as my major, its more of a
hobby for me) I understand that its very expensive if you wish to have an
extensive MF system.

For your budget, TLR is probably more appropriate, and I recommend a used
Rolleicord, forget about the Seagull TLRs, so what if they are new, if they
are prone to breakage (from online literature& comments from this NG), you
are losing the advantage of buying new (which should translate to reduced
problems), also i doubt that their customer services are any better than the
products they sell. You are getting a lightmeter also, so Yashica TLRs are
not that much of an advantage. So Rolleicord or Rolleiflex all the way. Gwd
I love these German engineered machines.

If you have a bigger budget, get an used SLR, continuing my obsession with
Rollei, I recommend a Rollei SL66, don't let anyone fool you, this is a far
superior camera for the money compared with Hasselblads, in other words, it
gives a bigger bang for the buck . This focal plane camera also allows you
to get high quality Zeiss glasses for next to nothing (compared with
leaf-shutter Zeiss lenses anyway). You can get a decent SL66 for about
$800-900, if you got lucky you might get one for $700 (like me...
unfortunately I had to let it go because I was getting a Rollei 6001).

Of course if you don't want a 6x6 SLR like Hassy or Rollei, there's always
Mamiya, who offers student discounts if you purchase their gear brand new
(however I doubt you'd be able to get anything for $400 despite the
discount). Check out their 645. however from the prices ive seen on ebay,
the best Mamiya deal at the moment is the RB67. Of course mamiya also has
their own TLR series, the C220 or C330, which offer interchangeable lenses
unlike other TLRs.

visit www.photo.net
or Robert Monaghan's site:
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/

Regards from one newbie to another.



From: nimages@capecod.net (David Grabowski)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Getting into MF?
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 

"Yossarian" like@totally.com>
wrote:

>
>"Roland" roland.rashleigh-berry@virgin.net> 
>> You won't regret buying a secondhand Mamiya TLR with its 80mm lens. They
>are
>> extremely good and cheap. And as you noted, they have interchangeable
>> lenses.
>
>This is what I'm leaning toward, but another within my price range
>(body-wise, I haven't looked at lenses) is the Hasselblad 500 series.
>
>All things being equal, is one preferable to the other - TLR vs. SLR, etc.?

You can get a real nice , clean Mamiya TLR for $400, but an SLR is
going to be a beater in that price range. Also the added lenses are
affordable for the Mamiya TLR. You might consider 645 , this would be
the closest comparison cost wise. The advantage to SLR is in close up
composition, if your main goal is scenic photography I see no
advantage at all personally, other than fixing a polarizer filter,
which in medium format I don't use an awful lot ( better saturation,
more tonal hold out). Well, there is the argument for removeable backs
as well, but if you tend to not want to change rolls mid way through ,
this isn't an issue either.

I've owned both, presently shoot the RB 67Pro S and the Mamiya TLR, if
I just want to carry a camera around and hand hold my shots I like the
220F ( actually like it better than the 330F) for this, or a fixed TLR
for that matter. In portraiture, the SLR has advantages for  head and
shoulder shooting IMO, also in macro work, also on assignment where
you may shoot two or three emulsions.

I think the guy mentioning tripod work was indicating that the sLR
will need the tripod sooner than a TLR. The TLRs are very smooth
shooters, no vibration, very quiet. You can hand hold to quite slow
speeds with the TLR design. Nothing is to say you can't put a TLR on a
tripod at all, kind of obvious that if hand held is good, tripod
mounted is better. The next thing that's nice, is the same tripod you
use for 35mm. is fine with the tLR, since the TLR actually has less
movement inside than even the 35mm. SLR. Medium format SLRs require a
sturdy pod, especially if you don't have mirror lock up.

 Another poster mentioned the Autocord, this is a great value, a
sleeper camera on the market, the lenses easilly outperforming the
ever so popular Yashicas. It is a fixed lens camera though (75mm.
lens) as any cords are or the Rolleiflex.

In the end, I think when you look up pricing on Hassy lenses you won't
need to look much further. I mean $200-$400 on average for most lenses
for the Mamiya or $750-$1500 even $2000 each for the Hassy just about
nails the coffin for many hobbiests. That's why I suggested 645, in
Mamiya or Pentax, the lenses are quite reasonable for the format as
well.

 Really the key to all this is to get started in medium format with a
system that will give you decent results. The rewards will show
themselves or they won't, so why go off the deep end on cost? The
Mamiya TLRs are worthy instruments, served many a pro for lots of
years, just stick with black lenses is all I have to say about it. I
cut my teeth in medium format with the Minolta Autocord ( not counting
my childhood years with dads medium format cameras back in the 50s)
after realizing 35mm. wasn't cutting it for me. A pro had lost his
business in a nasty devorse, lost his Hassy along with it and picked
up this Autocord to keep going. He took me under his wing, taught me a
bunch about lighting and metering, in the process I got hooked on
medium format.

David Grabowksi



From: Stephe Thayer ms_stephe@excite.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Getting into MF?
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 

Yossarian wrote:

> 
> My main interests have focused on landscapes, architecture, people -
> generally things that aren't moving fast, if at all (further, I feel that
> the comparative sluggishness of operating MF vs. 35mm will help me become
> better at composing). 

Using a camera that slows you down WILL help more than you can imagine.


> 
> But the wealth of information and availability of used medium-format is
> astounding. New Seagull TLR vs. old Mamiya (with interchangeable lenses)
> vs. old Hasselblad vs. old Bronica vs. newer Fuji rangefinder (which is
> probably out of my budget). 

I've used all of the above and for your budget a hassy would have to be 
pretty rough, a bronica may or may not be very reliable at this price, a 
seagull isn't reliable at all, a mamiya TLR is pretty heavy and you'd only 
have the budget for one lens anyway. That leaves a Fuji rangefinder which 
is a great camera but again would have to be pretty rough to fit your 
budget. An old rollei would be one good choice but a $400 one will be an 
older one with the dim focusing screen (cord V vintage) which isn't much 
fun to shoot with. I have a cord V and upgraded to a maxwell screen and 
ended up with aprox $500 and now it's a great user. My sugestion would be 
to find a minoltacord. Much better focusing system than a rollei of the 
same price, great optics and it will teach you how to use one lens. That is 
a good lession to learn and if you think right, you can get the shot you 
want with a normal lens most of the time. The mamiya isn't a bad choice if 
you don't mind the bulk/weight and later you could get other lenses, this 
can be a plus or minus depending on how you look at it!  :-)
-- 
 
  Stephe


Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: me@theairplanefactory.com
Subject: Re: Hartblei?
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 

"eMeL" badbatz99@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>radiojohn yeahsure@nospam.invalid> wrote 
>>...
>> I saw some footage of the Cosmonuats onboard MIR (or
>> some earlier effort) and even THEY were using the Kiev 60 over the the
>> more complex models.
>
>Generally it is true that in real world choosing Kiev 60 over the 80 is
>choosing a better construction and - at least potentially - a more reliable
>camera.  And once can always try to find some P-six Schneider optics which
>fits these bodies...
>
>> Does that tell you something?
>
>It tells ME absolutely nothing.  Knowing the Russian/Ukrainian mentality, it
>was probably a specimen carefully hand-assembled from hand-picked parts, NOT
>a stock model sold to you and me.  In real $$$ it probably cost the
>equivalent of 2000-3000 hours to manufacture and assemble.  And the crew
>probably had more than one on hand (a prudent thing to do with any
>mechanical thing, by the way, not only with a Kiev camera...)
>
>After all both the Russians (for the Tsar) and then the Soviets/Ukrainians
>(for whomever...) used to paint the grass green to make a good impression
>:-)
>
>Michael
>

I don't know about the better construction on the Kiev 60, how about a
simple design compared to the 88? I've had both and now have only the
60. The 88 just felt really fragle. The only problem I've had with the
60 is with frame spacing. Never an overlap, just really close at
times.

 Loading of the film is paramount to getting good spacing. The nice
part ot having this particular camera is the availability of some
relatively cheap Zeiss lenses made in the former DDR(East Germany). I
have the 50mm f4, 180 f2.8 and the 300 f4. All are nice lenses. I
shoot scenics with velvia in the 60 with typically great results. The
standard 80mm lens that came with the 60 compares nicely to the 80mm
of my Mamiya 645 1000s.

And yes, I have the adaptor to use the Zeiss lenses on the Mamiya.
I would not recomend either Kiev for the pro, but I found I like  MF
through using the 88 and then the 60 and that led me to the Mamiya
645. Without that realtively cheap start, I would be using just  35mm
gear. 

I toy with the idea of selling the Kiev on ocassion, but it won't
fetch much on ebay or elsewhere and it is fun to use a totally manual
clunky camera on ocassion. If any of you are looking to buy one, look
for the MLU option. Its worth it.


From: "Luigi de Guzman" Luigi12081@cox.rr.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Entry level Medium Format.....
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 


> I think the reason why few people now mention the Yashicamat 124G is the
> fact that its enduring popularity has made it *very* expensive.  A good
> Rolleicord can be had for not much more $ and its build quality is far
> better than the Yashicamat.

yup!

I wanted the medium-format taste without the major capital outlay, so my
first jump was to a lubitel.  Crap camera, but loved the negatives (despite
the light leaks).  Major commitment now in the form of a battered Rolleiflex
Automat MX (I think)--leatherette peeling in lots of places, gone on most
other places, stiff (slightly) focussing (but I've got strong fingers),
desilvered eye-level mirror thingie (but I'm discovering how much I love the
WLF, esp since I can use it w/o my eyeglasses.   freaky when you're -5.00
myopic...).  But a lovely Tessar on the front of it, and a few pretty slides
have sold me on the 6x6 format.  All for about US$50.  Hey, I love it:  it
produces really nice images, and it's ugly enough to be safe from
kidnappers.

a propos the 'camera weight' subthread:  the Rolleiflex itself isn't so
heavy, but its unusual shape gives it a lot more bulk than you would be used
to, at least compared to a 35mm SLR of the same mass.

-Luigi
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Tony Polson



From: kevin_i@my-deja.com (kevin_i)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Handheld Entry-level MFormat
Date: 10 Sep 2001 

Hi.

You say you don't need autofocus which is good, since the three AF 645
cameras are pretty new and prohibitively expensive.

By your requirements, that leaves: 1. autoexposure in a camera that
is...  2. cheap on the used market  3. handholdable ... and  4. with a
good line of accessories (this rules out most TLRs)...

I think your best and possibly ONLY answer is an old Mamiya M645 or
M645 1000s with an AE prism.  Not talking about the M645 Super or 645
Pro (more expensive)... and maybe not even the M645J (not sure if that
one can use the AE prism)...  But a camera body with 120 insert plus
an AE prism might be had for about US $250 (if you're really lucky) to
about $400-ish.

There are four prisms available for the M645 series -- meterless, CDS
metered, PdS metered, and AE.  All but the AE probably won't suit your
need for not wanting to mess with aperture and shutter speed.  And
even with the AE prism, it is aperture priority auto exposure meaning
that you choose the aperture and the meter selects the shutter speed
and sends that to the camera.  It's not fully auto exposure... but
aperture priority AE isn't half bad.

If you're *really* on a tight budget, you could try to get just the
M645 body and the AE prism... then go for a Pentacon 6 to Mamiya
adapter for about $30 on eBay or from KievCamera.com.  That way you
can use a wide range of *cheap* and great to "decent" Pentacon 6 or
Kiev lenses on your Mamiya until you can buy real Mamiya lenses (if
you really find that you need them -- I personally don't have any for
my 1000s).  With the adapter and Pentacon lenses, you do not have
automatic diaphragm control, meaning that you'll have to rotate the
aperture ring to open up the diaphragm for focusing and then manually
close it down before taking a picture -- this may or may not be a
problem, depending on your style of shooting.

Perhaps the only other option would be an older Pentax 645 which is a
lot more like a 35mm right off... but the Pentax 645 is a little more
limited in terms of accessories and customization which is why the
Mamiya M645 is my first recommendation.

Happy shopping.

-Kevin


"Neurula [Sydney]" klee@kensocoll.unsw.edu.au> 
> Also im a beginner, so i don't have much experience with photography (but
> ive got the basic physics basis its just that im too busy with college work
> to really start learning photography properly, but i will do that once i got
> my 'tools').
> 
> So are MFs totally manual? manual exposure? I have no problem with a manual
> focus, but I don't want to work out the shutter speed and aperture and all
> that manually.
> 
> "Neurula [Sydney]" klee@kensocoll.unsw.edu.au> 
> > Hi i know somebody else just posted a similar thread, but I am looking for
>  a
> > cheap entry-level that is portable and handheld, just something that is
> > cheap on used markets but has a wide range of accessories (and gives good
> > results!!).
> >
> > Thanks heaps.
> >


e.com!not-for-mail
From: kevin_i@my-deja.com (kevin_i)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Sorry for posting so many threads
Date: 11 Sep 2001 

Hi again.

The Mamiya M645 series by far has the widest range of lenses
available.  The Mamiya C series of TLRs has a few interchangeable
lenses available.  As far as I know, no other TLRs (Rolleicords,
Minoltas, Yashicas, etc., etc.) have interchangeable lenses, so you'll
be stuck with whatever is on the camera (screw-in conversion lenses
are available and *some* people report good results... most seem to
disagree).

My recommendation is still to go for a Mamiya M645.  If you don't need
the autoexposure prism then you can definitely pick up a basic camera
set for under $400... maybe with a plain prism, CDS prism, or PdS
prism... or maybe even an AE prism if you're lucky.  Just try to find
a prism without the horizontal dark line through the middle of the
viewing area when you look into it (separation, desilvering, or
something... no one seems 100% sure)...  It won't affect your
pictures, but it's distracting and you should be able to find a prism
without the line.

My personal problem with the M645 is that I really like the square 6x6
format and so my 645 Mamiya hardly sees any use.

The Mamiya C series TLRs are 6x6 shooters... and I like my C3... but
it is really different if you're coming from 35mm and takes a while to
get used to the TLR design.  It also makes shooting closeups tricky
(parallax problem) and using a polarizer, split neutral density
filters, and vignetters is a pain.  You'd have to weigh your own needs
and decide whether or not a TLR is for you.

The old Bronica S2 and S2A cameras are quite popular and can be had
for under US $400... but their lens selection isn't as wide as the
Mamiya M645's unless you're into lens hacking.  And they're all
getting pretty old so finding a good reliable user camera might not be
easy.

Kievs and Salyuts...  I like mine... but I wouldn't recommend them to
a newcomer to medium format.  They are flaky and temperamental things.
 I've put together a bit of an informational site you might want to
check: http://kievaholic.com ...  I try to be as honest about them as
possible... and while I'm okay with using one, many others would
probably be better off avoiding them.

Lightmeters.  Well... in-camera autoexposure is nice and convenient
but it can be tricked.  That is why a lot of serious photographers
recommend carrying a handheld incident light meter (the ones with the
white domes) that measures light falling onto your subject rather than
the light reflected from it.  This will not be fooled by tricky
subjects... but it takes practice to use and it's not always
convenient.  Having both a reflected light meter (in the camera or
handheld) AND an incident meter is probably best... you can choose
which one fits the situation.  But be warned... digital handheld
lightmeters are not cheap.  Old selenium cell "needle" meters are
cheap... but a little harder to use, IMO.

And yes... the lightmeter will give you a shutter speed/aperture
combination which you just transfer to the camera without further
computation... UNLESS you're using filters or extension tubes or other
such accessories that affect the amount of light getting to the film.
(figuring out exposure with a handheld meter and a polarizer on the
lens is not very fun)

Picking the right camera can be pretty hard, can't it?

Good luck!

-Kevin


"Neurula [Sydney]" klee@kensocoll.unsw.edu.au> 
> I have finally narrowed it down to these MF cameras that suit my needs (and
> available on Ebay):
> 
> 1. Mamiya C330
> Pros: interchangeable lenses, 6x6
> Cons:Too big for handheld shooting
>           No metering
> 
> 2. Mamiya 645
> Pros: handholdable, heaps of accessories
> Cons: not 6x6, M645 1000s heavy
> 
> 3. Rollei Magic II
> Pros: good quality, AE
> Cons: expensive, heavy (not sure, do ppl know how heavy it is?)
> 
> 3.Rolleicord V, Va, Vb
> Pros: good qual.
> Cons: expensive(unless i get lucky on ebay), non-interchangeable lens,
> heavy??
> 
> 4. YashicaMat124G
> Pros: cheap, good qual
> Cons: heavy?
> 
> Got anything else youd like to say about these cams?
> Any other models you have in mind that are lighter in weight??
> 
> THanks.


From: huib_smeets@hotmail.com (Huib Smeets)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Getting Started in Medium Format
Date: 13 Sep 2001 

Hi Matt,

It's difficult to answer your question, below some things I considered
when I was shopping for a MF camera. These considerations are very
personal but maybe it helps.

6x6 vs 645:
The square format is more comfortable as there is no need to turn the
camera otherwise a prism would be almost a must.

SLR vs TLR vs other designs:
SLR designs are almost allways 'system' camera's: they offer choices
of filmbacks, finders, lenses etc. I found having the abillity of
changing a filmback midroll very nice as I often switch between color
or BW film. When shooting weddings having several loaded filmbacks (or
at least the inserts) at hand is almost mandatory as filmloading takes
more time then the current 'drop-in' system of 35mm cameras, you could
loose a important picture.

Leaf vs Focalplane and flash:
Leafshutter lenses have a builtin shutter. The shape of the shutter
allows flashsynchronisation on all shutterspeeds, which gives you more
freedom to choose shutter and aperture and filmspeed combinations as
you are not resticted to one shutterspeed. But there are also some
drawbacks: Leafshutterlenses are more expensive than focalplane and
due to the size of the leafshutter the top speed is commonly 1/500s
and lenses are normally not faster than f2.8. (Faster lenses are
possible but than shutters get to big to operate at 1/500s).

Several MF camera's have a PC connector so that doesn't have to be a
problem, but I'm not familiar with the flash you mentioned so I could
be wrong.

Lens:
I think that a single 80mm is not enough to cover the wedding,
although it can be done ;-). Did you do your previous weddings with a
single 50mm lens? IMHO at least a wide-angle (40 - 50mm) and a
moderate tele lens (150 - 180mm) are also needed for overview/group
shots and head/portrait shots.

Metering:
Metering prisms are avialable but are heavy and expensive. I use a
handheld meter, meteringprisma do not offer better metering than
handheld meters. For shooting landscapes a handheld meter and some
experience is just what is needed.

Besides this you'll have to consider the build quality, lens quality,
price performance ratio, your budget, new or used, your personal bias
to some brand, etc etc.

As I said, this is very personal, others may consider different things
or value them otherwise.

Greetings,

Huib.


"Matt Clara" emjaysea1@home.com> wrote 
> Ok, this is my first time in this group and I'm pleased to see many of the
> regulars from the 35mm equipment group.  Hello all!  I've recently been made
> an offer I just about can't refuse.  I've shot several weddings in recent
> years, always for just the cost of film and developing as it's been for
> friends and acquaintances with little funds, and I've shot them all with
> 35mm Nikon equipment.  Today a cousin of mine (one I only see a couple times
> a year) asked me if I'd shoot his wedding, and the strange thing is, he has
> no problem with funds; in fact, he's loaded.  So I explained to him that
> he'd probably want someone with a medium format camera to shoot his wedding,
> and he asked me what a such a camera cost.  I gave him the high end, and
> then a low end.  He offered to buy me a medium format camera to shoot his
> wedding.  Needless to say, I was excited by such a prospect, so now I'm
> starting to look at equipment.  He wouldn't buy me the Hasselblad, but a
> used Maimya or something like that would be right in the ball park.
> 
> 
> So, the question is, what used camera body/ies and lens combo should I be
> looking at, and what else would I need?  My main subject matter in
> photography is landscape, so I'll want something I can use therein as well.
> Personally I'm thinking a Maimya 645 of some sort with an 80mm lens or
> wider.  I'll need a built in meter I can trust as I don't have a hand held
> (though that may be an option I need to consider, too).  I'll also need some
> sort of light source, like a strobe.  I do have a couple good Nikon flashes
> but I'm not certain whether those would work on a medium format, though they
> do have pc connectors.  I'd say $2000 is my limit.
> 
> Thanks for your time, and sorry for the lengthy letter.
> 
> Matt
> 
> PS the wedding is over a year away, so I have time to aquire the camera and
> get used to it before it happens.
> 


From: rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: How to buy used medium format gear?
Date: 2 Dec 2001 

med fmt is a bit different from 35mm SLR (and digital) in that there are 
many formats and options; many of us end up with several cameras which 
have different strengths. You have to do more research and thinking to 
pick the best fit to your needs. I also advise renting before buying to be 
sure the ergonomics match your needs...

see http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/features.html for intro to features

see mf/system.html on system buying issues

see mf/gindex.html for danny gonzalez's great med fmt reviews

see mf/cameras.html for links on specific cameras and sites etc.

see mf/hongkong.html on buying mail order and grey market (new)

see mf/albro.html on used dealers

see mf/guide.html on pricing online and price guide books

see mf/value.html for some best buys in budget gear

see mf/budget.html for budget med fmt options

see mf/index.html on general med fmt articles and issues

see mf/bronica.html on lens hacking and bronica cameras etc.

see ../broncameratest.html on how to test med fmt cameras

I also recommend reading a few general med fmt handbooks, such as
Ernst Wildi's Medium Format Advantage
Roger Hicks and Frances Schultz Med Fmt Handbook
Peter Williams Medium Format Cameras - User's Guide to Buying and Shooting
(amherst media) see also his reviews linked at 
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/cameras.html
Theo Disante HP books MEdium FOrmat cameras...

if you can't find these to buy, your local library may be able to get some 
of the older and out of print ones from interlibrary loan etc.

hope this helps.



From: miaim@mebtel.net (Mike)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: How to buy used medium format gear?
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2001 

Be VERY, VERY wary of purchasing into obsolete systems that haven't
been in production for years. I'm not suggesting not to go that route
if that's where your mind and your $ are, but just know what you're
getting into as much as possible before jumping on any "Bargains". 

Perhaps more important is knowing beforehand, where you're going to
get your film processed and what that will entail. If commercially, do
they do anything but process, and if so what will it cost you per
print. If at home, are you prepared in terms of suitable enlarger and
lens? Are you going to be satisfied with just B&W;?

I'm not at all trying to talk you out of MF. Personally, I consider
making MF B&W;'s in  8x10's and 11x14's just about the most fantastic
and most cost effective method of producing really eye catching images
in any format. But one does have to take into account the fact that
MF, for all it's stellar points, is also VERY, VERY different from
other more common, (and less common) forms of imaging. 

I've had several older MF cameras in an effort to get what I was
looking for, and I'd urge you to start simple and master that prior to
getting into the equipment race. Remember to factor in the cost of a
complete CLA for any used camera gear that you are contemplating. I
found out the hard way just how expensive this can be for MF leaf
shutter gear. It's wise to think of that prior to committing. There
are some fantastic MF bargains out there, but the bargains aren't
always obvious at first. 

The bottomline is this: MF may well be the most rewarding of the
various formats to work with, but the total costs of getting into it
generally far exceed the costs of the camera body alone. It's worth
it, but have your eyes open to the 'hidden costs' of processing,
enlarger lenses, sturdier tripods, etc. before jumping on that
'bargain' $200 camera. 

Mike Swaim


From: Thomas Edward Witte tw240895@oak.cats.ohiou.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Who Rents Lenses?
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 
	
	If you're not already, get a membership with CPS or NPS.  Unless
you use a different system, in which case I have no idea if they offer
such programs.  I can call CPS up and borrow almost anything I want for, I
think, 1 month.  All I have to do is pay shipping.

	Otherwise...

	Practically every camera store rents out gear.  Some places
however will rent out their used stuff, others will yank a brand new 400
off the shelf for you.  I'm not sure what your geographic locale is, but
Roberts in Indianpolis is my major equipment supplier.  800-726-5544, and
ask for the camera dept.

	In terms of price, it depends on what you get.  If you rent a
600mm F/4 it's probably going to cost you about $75-$90 a day, plus a huge
deposit.  A 50mm 1.4 you might get for $10 a day.

	Tom

GO Photography
http://www.mindspring.com/~photoj


On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, Dennis Galion wrote:

> I see a lot of advice to rent a lens before buying one and sometimes
> instead of buying one.  Sounds like a good idea if they're available
> to rent for a reasonable price.
> 
> Who rents them?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Dennis



From: "A Shooter" shooter@linux-info.net>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 
To: hasselblad@kelvin.net
Subject: Re: [HUG] Buying a Medium Format camera


 Gary Gallaher wrote:
> Hello everyone!
> 
> I currently enjoy taking pictures of nature, landscape and some portraits
> of people with a Cannon 35mm SLR and for the most part slide film. I am
> strictly an amateur who enjoys shooting up film and once in awhile
> producing a really nice picture. I try very hard to make good composures
> and am learning more and more how to do this.
> 
> I have been looking into medium format cameras and of course the
> Hasselblad seems to be the old workhorse and the camera against which all
> others are measured.
> 
> My questions are many: 
> 
> 1) Does it make sense for me to even consider buying a medium format
> camera?

This is a loaded question.  I dropped about four big ones in the spring for
a new Leica M6, 35 f/2, and a used 90/2.  Can I tell the difference between
it and my Nikon? Not really.  Would I give up my Leica, NEVER.  I have 
whated the Leica for over 14 years!  My point is that I bought the camera
because it made sense emotionally.  I love the camera, shoot with it a lot,
but do not expect to make much money with the camera...

I also bought a Blad system, but that was for portrait work.  My object is
the large print, upwards of four by five feet in size.  35mm simply cannot
hold up to that type of enlargement.  

I have started making money with the Blad, it has not paid itself off, but 
it will, thus, economically it did make sense for me to buy the Blad.

Does it make sense for you?  You have to answer that based on your own
priorities.

> 2) Should I buy a better (Hasselblad 501 or 503) camera or get a cheaper
> one to start out?

Again, a lot depends.  I considered buying something less expensive, but I
knew that if I did, once I made the money for a Blad, I would buy one.  I
like owning the best.

I don't know, but I do believe there is a difference between the Blad and
cheaper cameras.  I have a feeling that you have to be really anal, like
myself, to see the difference most of the time.

> 3) New or used? 

Do your homework.  There are some Blads that are very had to find used.
I bought my body, two lens, and three backs used and have had very good
luck with it over the last few months.

> 4) When blowing up pictures to the 8x10 size, will I notice a huge
> difference in quality vs. a 35mm? 

I have more experence of compairing 4x5 to 35mm.  In a 8x10 print, 
there is a noticable difference.  I would be willing to bet that the
average person would not notice much of a difference.  Enlarge the 
image a bit more to say, 16x20.  It is night and day!  With both films
being Tri-X, the 4x5 has zero grain, the 35mm looks like a beach!

> 5) Between a cheap and top of the line medium format camera, will I notice
> a difference in blowing up to the 8x10 size? (I assume that it is still 
> the lens that makes the most difference between pictures).

One advantage I heard about the Blad was that it's lens have better
contrast then the other brands.  This will payoff the most with 
B&W; (my preference) and backlite situations, something else I enjoy
shooting in.  This was another major reason I opted for Blad over
others.

-- 
A Shooter



from russian camera mailing list:
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 
From: kelvin kelvinlee@pacific.net.sg
Subject: Re: Re: seller Q/C


Yup. Which is why despite all the poo-poo about the old
Kiev B-mount, I have stuck with it. The lenses have
gotten cheaper than their P6 cousins as people are moving
to P6.

Sure the CZJ lenses are better, but I consistently
remind myself that my K88 system is a secondary one
and for fun .

If one wanted a "cheap" system without all the hassle,
frankly, take a look at these offerings:

Bronica ETRS
Mamiya 645

(or for those with slightly more budget)
Pentax 6x7
Bronica GS

You'd be surprised to learn they are not unaffordable
anymore, esp. in recent months. As I posted earlier,
I saw an ETRC kit for $300 . And even with it's age,
the bronicas give less trouble than a new Kiev.

My primary kit is a Bronica GS. I put toghether a kit
with grips, prisms, 2 bodies, 3 filmbacks, 1 polaroid
back and 4 lenses (50,65,100,150) for US$3000.

At least here in Asia (the Far East to some of you),
used Mamiyas and Bronicas go for 30-40% cheaper than what
you would pay in the US. My first MF camera was a
Bronica ETRSi kit with AE prism, speed grip and lens.
I bought it lightly used at US$700. If you have friends
travelling, get them to keep an eye open.

In my case at least, I have to be strict about not spending
more on russian gear than I do on the quality japanese ones!


you wrote:
>But what about the cost? By purchasing a Hartblei Kiev
>it's almost like buying "another" camera. I think the
>people who buy a Kiev to begin with are looking at the
>cost, and taking their chances on the quality of the
>camera they will receive. People bbuying a Kiev are
>looking at buying a system of inexpensive lenses to go
>along without spending the extra hundreds on the
>initial camera.
>
>Steve B


[Ed. note: long gone by the time you read this, but changing market
is providing some great buys in newer model medium format gear in 2002!]
From: jza1058168@aol.com (JZa1058168)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace.medium-format
Date: 14 May 2002 
Subject: FS bronica SQA,kit, $675,

FS bronica SQA, 80mm 120 back, prism finder, $675 ex plus condition


From: jza1058168@aol.com (JZa1058168)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.marketplace.medium-format
Date: 18 May 2002 
Subject: FS bronica SQ A, 80mm,120 bk, prismVF, $595

FS BRonica, SQ A,  as in title of ad, cheap ex plus condition, , $595



From: ovniruco1@aol.com (OVNIRUCO1)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 31 May 2002 
Subject: Re: Just got wet (was Taking the MF plunge)


>Research shows that it contains a 3-element anastigmatic lens.  The
>camera is made of cast aluminum, and was first manufactured in New York
>in 1947.  It is not considered a very serious camera, but the price was
>right---the clock guy threw it in for $30 when we bought a clock we had
>been searching for anyway.
>
>So, now I have a medium format camera, probably with a very soft lens,
>probably that will not keep the film flat...but it works!  I'm going on
>a film hunt later today.
>
>Thanks to all for the advice!
>
>
Interesting.  I got into MF in somewhat the same manner.  I was waiting in a
camera shop and started messing around with a Yashica LM that was listed at $30
bucks.  I am not sure, but the camera is probably about 50 years old.

When I got my first roll developed, my knees nearly buckled at the sharpness
and detail in the prints.  After many years of 35mm, I had not seen such
results.  Naturally that eventually led to spending some serious bucks on MF
gear.

-Ruco



Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Cheap Intro Medium Format Camera?
From: antispam@ftc.gov
Date: Fri, 31 May 2002


The Holgas and Lubies are great fun _after_ you have been using a
traditional non-toy medium format camera for a while.  But I don't think you
can call using them the same experience as a Yashica or whatever.  And I've
owned and used both.  Right now I have a Russian Skolnik and an Estapheta,
two very odd medium format cameras.  I'm also just finishing a review of the
WOCA for Shutterbug.

You can also make a medium format pin-hole camera, and get nice results.
But it is again not what most people would consider the true medium format
experience.

Aim a bit higher.

John

 > Before ruling out the Holga or the lubitels, head over to
 > www.toycamera.com for a look at the complete gallery list.
 > you'll see some Holga, Diana, and even some lubitel photos.
 >
 > Or head here....
 > www.davidburnett.com
 > for a look at a few of his Holga images.
 > You'll be able to spot the Holga images pretty easy among his other
 > photos. Pretty nice stuff if I say so myself.  I'd even say that if
 > he didn't purchase his holgas from me.
 >
 >
 > Randy
 > www.holgamods.com



From: fotocord fotocord@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Cheap Intro Medium Format Camera?
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 


m.bibby wrote:

> The only questions that I can answer at this point is:
>
> 1. My budget is 300-400 dollars
> 2. I enjoy taking "grab" photos versus setup shoots
> 3. Would like a relatively fast lens


Skip the fast lens. Very few cheap medium format cameras work well wide
open, most don't get sharp until f8 unless you pay $$$$$$ (or want to deal
with a kiev, which is what I did). $400 wouldn't go very far in the kiev
world as far as getting a reliable camera. IMHO most TLR's aren't good for
"grab shots either.

The better aproach is to use extra fast film. On 6X6 the 400-800asa print
films work very well and keep you from being forced into using large
fstops. From what you're saying, a folder sounds like what you'e looking
for. In the $300-$400 range you can get a really nice ikonta version 3 with
a coated f3.5 75mm zeiss opton tessar (it's sharper than the f2.8 version)
which has a coupled rangefinder incorperated into a bright viewfinder,
folds up small and can be used at f16-1/250 with 800asa without even
metering for most situations given the exposure latitude of that film. This
is the model with two windows on the top plate only not the older one with
the extra little "eye" on the front standard. Those have a seperate
rangefinder/viewfinder and aren't as easy to use. Another option is to get
a scale focus one (without a rangefinder) and guess focus and shoot. These
are lighter and smaller and if you're using small fstops, this is easier
than it sounds. Just make sure it has a 4 element tessar (color skopar,
xenar etc)  and you'll be happy with the results. Also if you don't like it
you can always sell it for what you paid and try something else.

--
Stacey



From: "Steve Wolverton" steve@wolvertonphotography.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Taking the MF plunge---in the shallow end
Date: Fri, 31 May 2002


The Rolleiflex's can be a very good option.  I just bought a '34 3.8
Standard with original lens cap and leather case for $35.00 and it work
perfectly!

Shop 'till you drop and you'll find these values, they're out there...  Of
couse, for $150.00 you can pick one up pretty quickly.

Steve

Don James stop_spaam@hotmail.com wrote...
> Don't forget to budget for a few basic accessories (lens hood, a few
> filters if you're shooting B&W;). They can end up costing as much as
> the camera. Look for a camera that includes these items, and maybe a
> lens cap and case. You'll pay much less for the package than you will
> buying them separately.
>



From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Cheap Intro Medium Format Camera?
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2002


antispam@ftc.gov wrote:
>
>  > Just what does the medium format experience consist of?
>
> Let's turn it around and ask what the medium format experience doesn't (or
> shouldn't) consist of:
>
> Light leaks
> Emulsion scratches
> Impossible to focus cameras
> Viewfinders that don't come close to what the lens lays down.
>
> Any of the above tend to dampen the spirits of the newbie.
>
> The Lubitel is curse with a modified focus system from the Voightlander
> Brilliant that virtually guarantees focus errors.  Otherwise, it is a fair
> performer, except when Ivan forgets to smooth the inside and the film is
> scratched.
>
> The Holga cannot be focused accurately, plus there is the scratch issue and
> the light leak issue.  Do we really want the first time user to strap up the
> body with electrical tape?
>
> Again, toy cameras and weird cameras are great fun for the person who tires
> of the predictability of most common "real" cameras.
>
> John


Let's look at cheap MF from another angle - first, the woods is full of
pack Polaroids. These are the ones that take the 6XX series film, ten
shots to a packet. If the new MF wannabe has a $10 bill in his/her
jeans, a Saturday morning spent at garage sales will turn up at least
one of the following Polaroid types:  250, 350, 450.  These are the
cameras with the glass lenses and Zeiss rangefinders.  Film is about
$1.00 per shot. You may have to replace the battery ($7.00 from
Polaroid), but they last a long, long time. If you want MF at really low
bucks, this is it.

Regards,

Marv


From: ppestis@aol.comnospam (Ppestis)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 01 Jun 2002 
Subject: Re: Cheap Intro Medium Format Camera?


>I am in the market for a medium format camera on a college student
>budget - i currenty have a pentax k1000 and want to get a good realiable
>medium format camera....Any suggetions would be helpfull....TIA


Yashica EM with the four element Yashinon 3.5 tessar type lens. Same lens as
Yashicamat, but you can pick up a good one for  about $75 on E-bay. 120 only,
no 220 but I don't care as I never use 220.   Avoid any  three element models.
The meter may not work due to the old selenium cell, but otherwise this is a
great lightweight camera.

Excellent sharpness at F5.6 and F8.  It actually makes a very good portrait
lens at F4 - as it is soft and give a real dreamy rendition.
No it's not a Hassy, Pentax, Mamiya, etc. but  with the negative size it's so
much better than 35mm.


From: kfritch@aol.com (KFritch)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 30 May 2002 
Subject: Re: Cheap Intro Medium Format Camera?


Since you've indicated that you use a K1000, you're obviously not going to be
put off by a camera that isn't totally automatic. There have been a lot of
suggestions, but there are a a number of considerations.  What medium format do
you mean, 645, 6x6, 6x7, or 6x9?  All use 120 or 220 film depending upon the
camera (not all can use 220)

I think the best suggestion so far has been the 6 x 6 C220 or C330 Mamiya.
These are professional grade cameras with interchangable lenses, a selection of
focussing screens, viewfinders (some metered) pararmenders, brackets and other
gizmos.  Enough were made that there's plenty of equipment on the market and
it's a system that can grow with you.  They are built like tanks and very
reliable.  If you want a fixed lens tlr, I generally suggest an older
Rolleiflex or a Rollecord.  I know they are a bit more expensive, but let's
face it, (a lot of other TLRs are "just as good"), Rollei produced TLRs which
are the standard by which others are measured.


In 6x7, take a look at the Koni Omega Rapid.  Sturdy, professsional grade
camera with a limited range of lenses,  The standard 90mm and the wide 58mm are
very good indeed.  The 135 is good, but uncommon and expensive.

In 6x9, Give a Graflex a chance.  Make sure you get one that will accept foll
film magazines.  (I believe it's called a Graflock back) 120 magazines for the
6x9 graflex can be had in 6x9, 6x7, and 6x6 sizes. A wide variety of lenses can
be had to fit this camera and you can experiment with mounting a wide range of
older plate camera and folder lenses for use with it.  (I have very nice
results from old Voigtlander Heliars scavenged from plate comeras as well as
others).  Of course, the coated Kodak commercial Ektars made for these cameras
are great.

There are other excellent choices such as the old Mamiya press cameras or the
Konica 6x7 TLR.  There are also some excellent folding cameras made by Zeiss,
Voigtlander, and Mamiya.   When I went to medium format I was faced with issues
similar to those facing you.  I acquired and used the above cameras over time.
My criteria was to acquire good, but obsolete professional grade equipment
capable of some degree of flexibility and technically capable of producing good
quality images.  Inexpensive need not be second rate.  Also, better grade
equipment will have a higher resale value if you decide to dispose of it so you
may wind up ahead in the long run.



Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Cheap Intro Medium Format Camera?
From: dfstein@earthlink.net (WS)
Date: Thu, 30 May 2002

KFritch kfritch@aol.com wrote:

> My criteria was to acquire good, but obsolete professional grade equipment
> capable of some degree of flexibility and technically capable of producing
> good quality images.

Amen. Good notes. This is one area where value resides because of the
present-day popularity of SLR cameras. I doubt if you can find anything
better, maybe at 10x the price??, of say the Mamiya Press-which can do
6x9- and its 100mm f/2.8 lens or some of the Konica equipment.  But it's
no wonder that the RB/RZ 67 cameras are so popular-an examination of Mr.
Mamiya's TLR or Press cameras reveals great intelligence and creativity.
And all the Mamiya cameras were brought out with a complete range of
focal lengths.  As GM likes to say in their ads, this is Professional
Grade stuff.



Date: Thu, 30 May 2002
From: "Mike Elek" melek@fptoday.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Cheap Intro Medium Format Camera?


You could go for an older Zeiss-Ikon Ikonta -- maybe a 521/16. Look for one
with a Tessar lens, rather than the Novar. I picked one up recently for
about $45, though the typical price probably is closer to $75.

If you're really on a tight budget (sounds like you are), possibly an Agfa
Isolette ($25-$75).

You might also want to look at a Rolleicord (less than $100)

On all of these, if possible, look for a Compur shutter. If it's a Prontor
shutter, make sure all of the speeds work.


From: "paulisme" paulcrowder@hotmail.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Add-on lenses for Rolleicord?
Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 

Hi, I recently acquired a Rolleicord Vb in great shape for $60 (!) and was
wondering if there are any add-on lenses such as wide-angle or telephoto,
similar to those for some digital cameras and camcorders with fixed lenses.
Any info would be greatly appreciated.

    Paul


From hasselblad mailing list:
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 
From: Jenny Morgan jennybimmer@macconnect.com
Subject: [HUG] New Member

Hi All,

I'm new to the list, but not Hasselblads. Bought my first 500c/m in '72,
then FOOLISHLY, sold it in '75 for college tuition. Bought one again
this fall, a '71 vintage 500c/m with 2- A12 backs, an NC2, an 80mm,
50mm, 150mm, 55mm ext tube, pistol grip, and a bay50 UV filter. All for
$1200.00 USD. Not bad, eh?

Recently added a 500mm, and an old metered prism from ebay. Today
though, I found a 500el/m at a liquidation sale for $320.00. Needs
batteries and a charger.

Anyone out there been using the 9v batt adaptation for any length of
time? I wonder about the amperage effects on contacts and the motor
windings, over time.

I'd love to get a copy of the EL/M manual as well.

-Jenny Morgan
Milwaukee, WI
USA


From: robmurr@aol.com (ROBMURR)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Date: 14 Aug 2002 
Subject: Re: when a hobby becomes too expensive


>Subject: when a hobby becomes too expensive
>From: mixxy_nj@yahoo.com  (Missy)
>Date: 8/14/02 
>
>Correct or not correct, the only once that stay as serious hobbyists for
>life are the super-rich. Otherwise, the rest of us who burn 20 rolls
>or more a month, who love
>photography so much but could not justify the huge expense involved with this
>obsession do not have a choice but to turn "professional", that
>is-- make money with photography so that at least we could
>continue reasonably with our "hobby".  Usually, amateurs
>eventually can't afford to burn hundreds of rolls and either
>quit the hobby (leave the slr in the closet and forget about it for months),
> or just become 1 roll a week shooters (which is really difficult to do),
>or else have somebody pay you to do this.
>Is this true for most of us? That's true for me.
>So what is the most economical way to stay with photography. Should I buy
>bulk film.  Can anyone suggest a lab that's not too pricey but
>produces good results. I'm not really picky yet with regards to my
>pictures but I can't be satisfied with Walmart quality. Any other
>suggestions on ways to save are welcome.

Here are some ways to cut some costs for you...

  1. Buy film in bulk from B&H; Photo...saves a ton right there.

  2. I shoot slides and the cost is less than prints, quality much better.

  3. make sure you need all those lenses and filters and bodies
      you have...if you are upgrading to the next body or next
     lens just cause it has another doo-dad on it, forget it!
     I have had almost every Nikkor or Canon lens made but
     The 3 major  things I got published with were done with a cheap
     Vivitar zoom on a manual body I got for about $50....

  4. I have probably paid for $15,000 worth of photo equipment
     over the years buy buying and selling photo equipment...
     This was before Ebay too! I did camera shows and found
     good working gear I could sell at a nice profit from photo
     students, local trading papers, Large newspapers, garage
     sales and pawn shops. You need to know a bit about all
     kinds of cameras, but now you can sell on Ebay. I have found
     $2,000 lenses for $1,000, $1,000 worth of darkroom gear
     for $60! This will take some work but worth it.

5. Now, on the other hand two good friends of mine each are
      hobbyists and own at least $25,000 worth of gear each!
      It is their only hobby and they are very good at it.
      They also spend probably another $5,000 in film, processing
      and travel for photography EACH year. Lucky for them their
      wives are very much involved in photography also!

    Good Luck.


From: "David J. Littleboy" davidjl@gol.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya 645E for ~$700?
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002

"Oscar" captorb@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> It's just a discussion. Doesn't it seem odd to you that Mamiya has dropped
> its price on the 645e by 50%? I've never known any business to drop its
> price on a hot selling item, be it cars, cameras, etc.

Yes. At US$1,400 or so, it's unlikely to be a hot selling item. Mamiya is
somewhat overpriced in the states, so maybe they've figured that they're on
a point in the supply/demand elasticity curve where lowering the price would
increase profits.

Or maybe they're positioning it as a loss leader to sell more lenses.

Or maybe they've got the kinks out of their mfg. line in China and are
producing them hand over fist and need to move them radically faster. I'd
guess, all of the above.

> Maybe the digital age isn't the cause of the price drop; perhaps, as I
> mentioned, it wasn't marketed properly. Photographers going into medium
> format are experienced [not necessarily good] and are looking for more
> advanced equipment.

This is quite likely as well. At US$700 it's an entry level camera competing
with used Fujis and the Kiev 88. And I'd guess it would complete quite
nicely against those...

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan



[Ed. note: with rise of digital, and 50% decline in USA medium format sales, we
are seeing some great bargains such as this Mamiya 645E for $750 new in USA...]
From: Drew Saunders dru@stanford.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Mamiya 645E now fairly inexpensive.
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002


I'm sure many of you know this already, but the prices on the 645E have
dropped significantly recently. I was thinking about this camera a while
back when the kit was $1300, but now they're under $800, and that's for
the kit (w/ lens and insert) that includes the rapid winder. At that
price, I decided to fill in the gap between my 35mm stuff and 4x5 and
ordered one. Now I think I'll do a google search to see what folks say
about the camera (a little out of sequence, I know...)

Drew
--
Drew W. Saunders


[Ed. note: another caution to check the options and freebies with new gear for possible buys!]
From: John Halliwell john@photopia.demon.co.uk
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: MF renaissance? Re: Digital
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002

Robert Monaghan rmonagha@smu.edu writes
>In short, I think we may see a "Medium Format Renaissance" similar to the
>current and on-going rangefinder renaissance in 35mm (Konica,
>Voigtlander..). For example, the $650 Mamiya 645E Chinese made cameras
>seem to offer a good buy for newbies. The new 6x6cm AF cameras may also
>tempt 35mm types who have held off on MF due to lack of an AF option etc.
>The new Kiev cameras are only one step away from cloning a focal plane
>hassy, and already offer auto-action M645 lenses from the factory etc.

The situation in the UK maybe skewed a bit by the very tempting
introductory offers available from virtually all the big players. If you
buy a complete camera kit (usually body, back, lens and finder) you'll
usually get something free (usually either a 120 or Polaroid back but
sometimes prisms or motors). As different manufacturers deals expire,
the competition come up with a new one and the expired deal gets
extended further.

It really makes for a better deal than buying used kit, even in mint
condition (assuming you want an extra back - who doesn't?). This has the
effect of dropping the sensible used price of the basic 'kit' even
further. Accessories that don't make this basic kit don't suffer as much
because there harder to find at good prices. When I bought my new
Bronica SQ-B (with an extra free 120 back), I paid less than I would
have done for a used (EXC++) kit and used (EXC++) back.

I guess many 35mm photographers might end up turning away from 35mm (at
least for some of their work) by the increasing reliance on electronics
and increasingly 'flimsy' construction (many AF zooms really feel like
junk). I have a load of 35mm Pentax kit, decent new prime lenses are
available but (peculiar to Pentax UK it seems) very hard to find and
usually have to be ordered (very expensive - small volumes), even lenses
no more 'exotic' than a 35mm f/2. I certainly found a 6x6 SLR and WLF
and separate meter brings much more enjoyment into my photography.

--
John
Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk



[Ed. note: pretty hard to beat for a bargain medium format kit ;-) ]
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 
From: Tara & Ed Green egreen@wyoming.com
To: rmonagha@mail.smu.edu
Subject: Yashica A

Bought mine for $2.00 at a yard sale. Case is a little worn but the
camera works fine. I use mine for black and white work.


From: asfl@freemail.com.au (Thom)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: 120 roll film camera
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2002

colombini8@interfree.it (LucaC) wrote:

>Hi all,
>
> what would you suggest for a 120 roll film camera to start with, at a
>reasonable price ?
>
>Thanks,
>Luca.

Used Yashica 124G
New Kiev 60
New Kiev 88CM
4 element Seagul
Seagul 202 folding camera 6x6
Mamiya C-2, C-22, C-3 and C-33 (used of course)
Mamiya Super 23 (used)
Used RB-67
Used Koni-Omega
Used Norita

THOM


[Ed. note: recent dealer ad of 10/2002 to highlight price fall in "classic bronica/nikkors"]

Bronica S/S2/S2A/EC Series Mount Nikkor-P 200mmf4.0 Ser.#34324 With
Built-In Hood, Front Cap And Original Rear Cap(E++) $149.

Bronica S/S2/S2A/EC/ECTL Mount Nikkor-Q 13.5cmf3.5 Ser.#24347(E++) $89.

Bronica S2 Ser.#59660 With Waist Level Finder, 120mm Back Ser.#55518 With
Dark Slide, Nikkor-P 7.5cmf2.8 Ser.#106838 And Original Strap(E++) $249.

Ed. Comments: this is an interchangeable lens SLR 6x6cm with excellent nikkor optics for $250!
A few years ago, such a camera in E++ would have cost over $500. Similarly, the nikkor 200mm
with hood, caps, and so on would have been significantly more. The same dealer recently sold
a 135mm nikkor for bronica S2/EC for $89! It would be hard to get 35mm nikkors for that price,
let alone 6x6cm nikkor optics! ;-)...


From: rmonagha@smu.edu (Robert Monaghan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: kiev lenses vs. other bargain MF? Re: Newbies and the Kievs
Date: 27 Feb 2003 

yes, in many cases the kiev lenses are great buys, but there is another
part to this story as other MF used kits get cheaper and cheaper. Consider
the Mamiya 645E - new warranteed camera for $750 US$ in USA, with lots of
decent low cost mamiya optics for little more than Kiev equivalents, yes?
When the reworked hartblei Kiev88 bodies are $500-600+, the $750 new
mamiya 645E is very competitive IMHO. This is very different from 2 years
ago, when new MF SLRs started around $2k, and used pro kits were $1k+.
Today the new MF kits start at $750, and used pro kits are $350-500+ & up.

see  for kiev prices

most of the arsat ukrainian made lenses for K88/P6 mounts seem to run an
average (median) price about $250-350, less if you use direct imports, but
you may have other costs there (money conversions, western union fees,
cost of mailing back returned items etc.), but rather more if you get USA
warranted lenses, hopefully with less risk ;-)

The really desirable lenses, IMHO, are the schneider and zeiss jena lenses
in P6 mounts, which seem to run circa $300 to $650 with a median price
around $400-450 US$. These are also older used lenses (or very old stock?)
USed versions of these lenses are available by direct buys via ebay to
Russia or ukrainian sources for circa half these prices, but with more
risks (e.g., mailing insurance not available on some transactions etc.)...

By comparison, a number of the classic bronica s2/EC lenses, including
many older nikkors, are available at similar price points, even from
dealers. Kowa 6/66 lenses are more costly, but have leaf shutters, and
again, I have seen any number of lenses in this same $300-500 price range.

The older used hasselblad C lenses are also turning up at prices about
half of what they were two years ago. I've bought 150mm C lens for circa
$400 from a local dealer, and quite a few of the older C lenses are being
sold in the under $750 and even some below $600 on eb*y, etc.

checking completed auctions on ebay for mamiya 645 lens I see 150mm f/4
selling for $210, 645J camera and 80mm lens for $350, macro lenses under
$300, ultrawide 35mm for $350, 70mm leaf shutter lens for just over $200.

But my point here is that the cost differences between the more desirable
kiev zeiss jena (let alone schneider) lenses and Hartblei reworked bodies
usually recommended by users, and the cost of non-Kiev competitors (such
as Bronica S2/EC, Kowa), including new mamiya 645E kits (at $750!) and
used mamiya 645 kits (as just one example, could have done pentax 645
etc.) - the differences are now rather less than in the past.

I still believe and recommend the Kiev60 as a basic low cost SLR (given a
return warranty and willingness to use it to get a fully working example).
ANd the 30mm fisheye lens is reason enough to buy into the kiev system(s).
When someone says they can only afford $150-250 to get started in MF, then
the Kiev60 SLR is about the only option ;-)

But in the $500 range and up, there are a lot more options than in the
past, and Kiev88 esp. reworked models have more cost effective used gear
competition out there now, in these times of depressed resale value for MF
gear...

bobm



From: flexaret2@aol.com (FLEXARET2)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 28 Feb 2003 
Subject: Re: kiev 6s

Today a good Kiev 6C with TTL finder, 90MM f2.8 normal lens and case
should sell for $100 to $175 depending on condition, warranty and who you are
buying it from.

The 120MM Biometar or 120MM Vega lens should sell for $120 to $175 depending on
condition etc.

The 300MM lenses available are-

TAIR - $100 to $150
PENTACON/ORESTEGOR - $100-$135
Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar - preset or automatic(single coated) $$125-$175
same as automatic multicoated ($200-$350)

These are only my estimates. The Kiev 6C (6S) can be a great camera
in a sample that works well.

- Sam Sherman


From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Cheap student camera?
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 

The absolute balls-to-the-wall cheapest MF camera is your garden variety
Polaroid 100 - 250 - 350 - 440 (or the 110A/B if you want to move
upscale) pack camera. Get 'em a flea markets or garage sales for about
one dollar. Upen it up, clean it out, make sure the battery works, then
load (in a darkroom or changing bag) one sheet of real 4 x 5 film into
the camera, close it up, and shoot. Voila! a real MF camera with real MF
film. For more info, look up the article on this technique in the "Land
List". Have fun.

Regards,

Marv

DH wrote:
> I'm sure this gets posted hundreds of times,but here goes again. I am a
> relatively poor college student in need of a MF camera for class. Any
> suggestions? I am looking to spend less than $200 if possible but not get a
> Kiev 60 which people told me in an earlier post suck. Thanks for any help
> you can give.


From: Marv Soloff msoloff@worldnet.att.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: cheap m-f camera
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 

Cheapest entry point into MF is to buy (acquire) a Polaroid 250, 350,
450 camera for about $3.00 - $5.00 at a garage sale or flea market, make
sure the batteries are ok or get new ones (from Polaroid - $7.00) and
get some 655 positive/negative film. This setup will give you a 3 x 4
inch negative and print and you can judge what you are getting into.
The Yashica, Minolta, Ricoh, Rollei TLRs come later.

Regards,

Marv

slaX0r wrote:
> I'm considering making the jump to medium format, having shot 35mm for the
> last 15 or so years. Can anyone make some recommendations for an
> inexpensive camera? From what I've read, I'm leaning towards 645 format,
> but I'm not married to the idea. Since this is an experiment at first, I
> don't want to invest a whole lot of money in it (yet). ;)


From: "k" felaffel@PING.com
Newsgroups: aus.photo
Subject: Re: medium format recommendations?
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 

"ahennell" andrew@hennell.com.au.com wrote 
> Looking for some recommendations for a first-time Medium Format setup.
> Most of the work will be in the field - rural settings, national parks,
> & the like. looking at the wider end - 6x7 or thereabouts.

If you are not ageist when it comes to cameras you'll find the old Baby Graflex
6x7 coupled rangefinders are a nice cheap compact camera with a focal plane
shutter that can use leaf shutter lenses - focal lengths from 47mm upwards. no
good if you can't cope without a reflex view of the world however, but you DO
have tilt and shift - not available on anything other than a few of the more
expensive blads, Rollei's and Fuji's. Gives you a distinct advantage when you
want to maximise your DOF.

Another group of cameras worth a look as cheapie intro MF's are the Mamiya Press
and Polaroid 600SE series. Both can take RFB's from 645 to 6x9 and support
lenses down to 65mm (on the mamy's) and 75 on the Pola's. Cheap, moderately
light rangefinder MF's they held their own against many other cameras in their
day and can be found relatively cheaply these days. One of the Mamiya's also
has rear movements, again handy for maximising DOF within the focal length
limitations of the lenses used. Interchangeable backs from mamiya (including
the multiformat 645,66,67,69 - all interchangeable mid roll!!) , Singer and
Graflex can be used so you have a wide variety of backs available.

Another gem is the Graflex XLSW taking a 47mm Super Angulon up to 6x9. I'm not
a competition photographer but it pleases me to say my XLSW which I lent to
someone recently was used to take the winning shot this years in the Canon
Awards landscape category. As with all the cameras above, this too takes a wide
variety of Mamy and Graflex backs of various formats. The others in the Graflex
press range are more like the Mamiya Press/Pola 600SE and may be worth a look.

I'd also recommend the KoniOmega Rapid, but those bastards are still holding
their price (lots of $$).

.. anyway, just a few 'alternative' suggestions to the one's you've already
recieved (which were all good:-)

best of luck!

karl


From: Rafe B. rafe.bustin@verizon.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Used 'blad prices - a sad (happy?) thing to see
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 

Randall Ainsworth rag@nospam.techline.com wrote:
> I considered selling my Hasselblad stuff when I go the 10D so that I
>could possibly afford the full frame sensor job. But from what I could
>tell I'd be lucky to get $5,000 for my stuff. I worked too hard to get
>it all and I'd cry to let it go. So I didn't sell.

I'm thinking similar thoughts here...

Wondering how much to keep of my old Nikon
outfits -- a 23 year old FE and a 13 year old 8008,
with associated lenses of the similar vintage.

My Mamiya 645E was bought new for $1350
at BH less than three years ago. It's selling
for $700 (new) at BH right now.

rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com


From: "nathantw" nathantwnospam@removesbcglobal.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Used 'blad prices - a sad (happy?) thing to see
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003

I was looking at a few auctions on ebay and tracked the items I actually
owned myself to see what I could get for them. The items I bought used about
10 years ago were the 553ELX for about $1200, a 60mm CF for $1300, and a
PME-45 for $950. Well, the auctions ended and the 553ELX sold for $700, 60mm
for $800, and the prism sold for $399. Those were incredibly cheap prices.
I'm actually jealous I didn't get them for those prices. However, on the
other hand if I were selling my equipment I'd be sad that I couldn't get as
much as $1000 for each item.

So are digital cameras and the decline of film usage really making
Hasselblad equipment prices (or camera gear in general) drop like rocks?

Amazing.



From: "redcat" gtg768c@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: oh, the joy of the square
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 

Got my first color 120 film developed and printed today. i cant believe my
40 year old TLR (acquired 20 days ago) can produce such vibrant colors and
tones! it sure knocks out my N80.

am so glad i blew all my meagre tax returns into getting this mamiya c330.

hmm, i really like the square. can anybody recommend book(s) that talk about
or showcase square composition?

also, with a 80 lens set at infinity, and aperture at say around f3, what is
the minimum distance beyond which i will get everything in sharp focus? i
thought i left 7 feet, but didnt get foregrounds sharp enough.

thanks mucho,
redcat


From: Nick Zentena zentena@hophead.dyndns.org
Subject: Re: Pentacon 6
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 

geo no@no.com wrote:
> I don't know how you can beat a classic Bronica. I just got a EC-TL, back,
> 50mm, 75mm, 200mm, ext tubes, WL & RA finder, case, for $625.
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category;=3350&item;=2955524061


You haven't looked at the costs for things like the Kiev 60. Lets see.
Less then $200 [I think including shipping] got me a 6x6 body. WLF. 45mm and
80mm lens. An additional $75 got me a 6x4.5 body [for when I feel like
miniature format -))] a 90mm lens, TTL prism, case and even a couple of
filters. I could easily add a 250mm and either the 30mm or something like
the 150mm and not be much over $600.

Nick


From: "David J. Littleboy" davidjl@gol.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Best Medium Format under $1000
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 20

"Jerry Gitomer" jgitomer@erols.com wrote ...
>  Michael Scarpitti wrote:
> [ great big snip ]
> >
> > A $300 lens cannot be as good as a $3000 lens can be. That's undeniable.
> > there simply isn't the capability of manufacturing to do so.
>
> I agree with you, but if the $300 lens is 95% as good as the $3000 lens
> and the difference isn't discernible to the naked eye or in the largest
> size print I might be interested in making there is no sense to my
> spending the additional money.

It's worse than that. I wouldn't use a $3000 lens without a UV filter, but I
don't use UV filters on $300 lenses. The extra flare may make the $3000
worse than the $300 lens.

Also, the $3000 lens may be optimized for something different than what you
want. The new internal focussing 40/4.0 Distagon for the Hassy is optimized
for flat field characteristics at the expense of distortion. The flat field
characteristics mean that it focuses evenly on the whole of a resolution
chart and thus tests to be an amazingly good lens. (I suspect that that was
the only way they could make a lens that would test better than the Fuji
35mm f/3.5 lens for the H1.) At the expense of distortion. No thanks.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan


From: napperwm@aol.com (NapperWm)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 10 Nov 2003 
Subject: Re: Best Medium Format under $1000


>Mamiya does make some stellar medium format optics, as you know. One of my
>joys has been to discover that Mamiya also made a series of lenses for the
>RO200 rapid omega series lens mount.

Everyone interested in MF rangefinders should own a rapid omega.
I have 3 bodies and several lenses so I can keep this system going. The 58mm
lens is awesome when coupled with the absolutely flat backplane film holders!
It will produce B&W; negatives that are sharp beyond your vision! I have cropped
16x20's that you can look up close and still see into the image!

Once you own one you will always keep it for certain shots. I also have a C33
and C330. Also favorites but not quite up to the Rapid omega for sharpness.
Have a Kiev 88 when I need a SLR but I love to sync my flash at 1/250 so It has
limited use. (It still has outstanding optics!)

As you can see once you work with MF in B&W; you can develop a habit! It will
consume all of your extra cash!!!!!!
Run now while you still can.



From: "Sherman" shermanDELETETHIS@dunnam.net
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Best Medium Format under $1000
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003


"jjs" nospam@nospam.xxx wrote...
>  stacey fotocord@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > jjs wrote:
>
> > > Sealgull and Kiev are unreliable. I can't stand that. It is terribly
> > > disheartening to climb to a mountain top, or take a day off to do
> > > photography and find the camera broken in your hands.
> >
> > Personal experience or repeating what other post here, like Michael?
>
> I've used unreliable equipment. Bronicas in the sixties, Kievs later. It
> sucks when a camera breaks when you need it. But as I told the original
> poster, it's all up to the individual. You have different standards. So be
> it.

Well said! I shoot mostly 4x5 so when I decided to get a MF camera I went
with a Kiev 88CM. I knew that the cameras could be unreliable. I also knew
the lenses were very good and affordable. I was willing to accept the
reliability issues as it wasn't my "main" camera. I have done something
with it I could not have done with a Hasselblad- added four additional
lenses in mint condition. So far the camera has performed very well. I
have had one back leak, my fault, I tried to force in the darkslide, long
story but I would have damaged *any* MF back!

Bottom line I suppose is that if I had to depend on it for a living I'd
either purchase a couple of spare bodies or go with a different system.
However it makes great images and had worked for me.

Like John said, everyone has to set his own priorites and decide what he is
willing to accept, keeping in mind that sometimes even Hassys break!

Sherman
http://www.dunnamphoto.com


From: stacey fotocord@yahoo.com
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Best Medium Format under $1000
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003

Bob Monaghan wrote
> Oddly, the top rated lenses continue to be Kowa and
> bronica nikkors over rolleiflex and hasselblad zeiss optics ;-) Doesn't
> bother me, as I own all this stuff, so I can pick what I want ;-)

I've had fun with my new Hartblei that uses 'blad backs. When I show the
chromes to the guys at the camera store they look at them with a loupe and
proclaim "Yep I can always spot the quality in the blad lenses.." I haven't
the heart to explain they were shot with an Arsat or God forbid a Mir!
--
Stacey


From: Jason Tay [shutay@tm.net.my] 
Sent: Sat 11/29/2003 
To: Monaghan, Robert 
Subject: Value buys in Medium Format


 
Bob, have you seen these prices on Robert White???

http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/bronica.htm

Bronica ETRSi + 75mm + WLF + 120 back = GBP495
Bronica RF645 + 65mm = GBP 590
Bronica RF645 + 65mm + 45mm + 100mm + RF20 flash = GBP1315

These are quite literally silly prices! Mamiya 645E not the only new
value buy these days!

Jason	 



From: captnud@aol.com (Capt Nud)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 01 Mar 2004 
Subject: Re: Mamiya Price

I have a friend who got a M645 for $320. Geez, medium is getting really
cheap...








End of Page