# Choice of Medium Format film cameras



## CraigBTE (Feb 9, 2011)

A very knowledgeable friend of mine is buying a camera for me in Korea, and over the weekend he scoped out a few for me. I'm looking for some advice and reasons on the following options.

Unfortunately I don't have exact model numbers, which I know is crucial, but comments on the systems overall and recommended models would still help.

The 3 options are

A) Bronica Zenza (not sure about model) with 75mm 2.8 
$420

B) Pentax 645 (I'm hoping the NII) with similar lens
$550

Double the price

C) Hasselblad 503CX with awesome Zeiss 80mm
$1100

I could also get the Bronica with 2 lenses for about the same price as the Pentax.

What would you recommend and why?


----------



## Derrel (Feb 9, 2011)

Why the second, duplicate thread and poll?
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...234518-choice-medium-format-film-cameras.html


----------



## CraigBTE (Feb 9, 2011)

Just hoping to get more answers in the film section


----------



## djacobox372 (Feb 9, 2011)

Do you need a "system camer?"  Because I'm a big fan of the fuji fixed-lens rangefinders (looking for the 6x7 version for myself now).  They are easier to come by in asia, and in the $400-500 price range.

Kinda like a poor-mans Mamiya 7 (my recommendation if you are going to be spending $1000 on a camera)


----------



## MattxMosh (Feb 11, 2011)

I recently got two bronicas, 4 backs, three lenses, two AEII prisms, a standard prism and a speed grip for $120 less than that.

Maybe your knowledgeable friend shouldn't hose you.


----------



## usayit (Feb 12, 2011)

For me its between the hassy and the Pentax 645.   I Like my Pentax 645 for the way it handles and the availability of lenses.  It is a simple camera to operate.   The hassy square negative never felt natural to me.

Things I like the Hasselblad over the pentax, removable back and viewfinder.  The Pentax 645 doesnt have either.... it has a film insert instead of a back.

Also, the the digital Pentax 645 is the cheapest current model digital MF on the market right now at $9k usd brand new.   It makes an upgrade path to digital using the same system more feasible in the near future.   Digital backs for the Hassy are priced higher.


----------



## Vautrin (Feb 13, 2011)

Quick Rules for making a decision for buying a camera:

1.  The more money you spend, the "better" your kit.  
2.  "Better" may not mean better images.  It may mean "better" features, brand name, or cosmetic appearance of the camera.
3.  Your degree of poverty (or wealth) will thus determine where you want to be

The thing is, you can take excellent pictures with a 30 year old camera you got for a song off ebay, and you can take horrible pictures with a $100k camera if you don't know what you're doing.   In the end, it's not about the camera it's about the photographer.

If you do some research on the different cameras you mention, you'll see these cameras may not all be the same.

The Hasselblad 503CX is, IIRC, fairly late model.  This may explain the difference in price over the bronica.

Hasselblads also tend to go for a premium over other cameras because of their reputation.  Rightfully or wrongly so, you'll pay more for a 'blad then for another camera.  

With that said, a Hasselblad is more compact then some of its cousins.  I bought a mamiya RZ67.  I love it, but the thing is a beast.  I paid less then the hassy, but it's bigger and bulkier.

The other thing to look at is how modular the system is.  Pentax 645 IIRC doesn't have interchangeable backs.  With teh hasselblad you can get a few backs, and switch between different film types.  This can come in handy, and is definitely nice to have.

Lastly, if money is a concern you can find some really great deals if you take the time to search.  Downright ugly mamiyas will still take great pictures.  I have a Pentax I bought for about $100 USD inclusive 3 prime lenses (28mm, 50mm, 135mm) and I love the thing.  

The bottom line is, if you just want to screw around with medium format and don't have a lot of money, go cheap (maybe even a roliflex or yashica).  You'll still take pictures of much better quality then 35mm format -- digital or film.  

If you have the money, get the best kit possible, but do your research in terms of features.

Do the Hasselblads and the Bronica use a waist level viewfinder?  You might want to find out as it's a different way of shooting compared to a regular point and shoot.


----------



## Professional (Feb 13, 2011)

Vautrin said:


> Quick Rules for making a decision for buying a camera:
> 
> 1.  The more money you spend, the "better" your kit.
> 2.  "Better" may not mean better images.  It may mean "better" features, brand name, or cosmetic appearance of the camera.
> ...



Couldn't agree more, i bought Hassy 501cm and RZ67II and even Fujica GSW690III [also 2 Holgas], out of all these i can choose Hasselblad as my favorite camera, but the problem is that it is the most one in my collection i have problem with focusing, but this will never stopping me to choose it over the others.


----------



## Vautrin (Feb 13, 2011)

Professional said:


> Couldn't agree more, i bought Hassy 501cm and RZ67II and even Fujica GSW690III [also 2 Holgas], out of all these i can choose Hasselblad as my favorite camera, but the problem is that it is the most one in my collection i have problem with focusing, but this will never stopping me to choose it over the others.




That's the one really big problem with a waist level finder...  Before taking the plunge you really should try one out...  Some people love them, but others hate them.

Also remember the bigger your format the shallower the depth of field.

So IIRC for 120 film you only have 2cm depth at f. 2.8 which makes focusing correctly much much much more difficult


----------



## Professional (Feb 13, 2011)

Vautrin said:


> Professional said:
> 
> 
> > Couldn't agree more, i bought Hassy 501cm and RZ67II and even Fujica GSW690III [also 2 Holgas], out of all these i can choose Hasselblad as my favorite camera, but the problem is that it is the most one in my collection i have problem with focusing, but this will never stopping me to choose it over the others.
> ...



But i don't have this problem with my Mamiya RZ67 ProII, i use waist level finder with Mamiya RZ as well but not problem as Hasselblad, so how come? Also i have Fuji GSW690III also 120 format and it is larger film size than Hasselblad and Mamiya [6x9] and it is much easier than the Hasselblad and Mamiya [i think you will tell me it is because this camera is rangefinder which is different], but i really like the Mamiya WLF and it is brighter and more clear than Hasselblad, but the weight of Mamiya is damn crazy.


----------



## Vautrin (Feb 13, 2011)

Professional said:


> Vautrin said:
> 
> 
> > Professional said:
> ...



The thing with medium format film is that your depth of field is shallower when measured in inches / cm, then for 35mm at the same f stop.

So it's more important that you get spot on with the focusing.

Depending on your set up (do you have a microprism in your waistfinder and a magnifier) it may be easier or more difficult to focus.


----------



## Vautrin (Feb 13, 2011)

ok

Depth of Field Table

At 1 m, f2.8

50mm lens, 35mm film depth of field is 0.97m to 1.03m
80mm lens, 120mm film 6x7 format, depth of field is from 0.94m to 1.07 m

I stand corrected


----------



## Mike_E (Feb 13, 2011)

No, the DOF is greater the larger you go format wise.  It's figured by the focal length of the lens so 50mm on 35mm film is less than 50mm on say a 6X7.

If you want to talk about perspective and DOF you have a point but it's a different thing and mislabeling leads to problems down the road.


----------



## Professional (Feb 16, 2011)

I am not talking about the depth of field, i am talking about focusing, if i use say 2.8 on a portraits, i can focus fine with my Mamiya RZ, but very difficult with my Hasselblad 501CM, i even love that Mamiya RZ67II finder because it gives me 3D look, while with Hasselblad finder it can do that but not bright and not clear so i need a lot of light around and in the scene and i even need to focus and refocus hundreds of time to be sure on one subject and many times i miss it, but with RZ i get about 96% spot on, Hasselblad about 70-80%, not talking about how the Depth of field will be or look like, and if you mean to calculate the distance, well, this is not always making it easy to know the exact distance and as i said if i choose say f2.8-f4 i may miss a bit because i measured the distance wrong and not accurate, so how can you focus with your Hasselblad 500 series?


----------



## Vautrin (Feb 17, 2011)

Professional said:


> I am not talking about the depth of field, i am talking about focusing, if i use say 2.8 on a portraits, i can focus fine with my Mamiya RZ, but very difficult with my Hasselblad 501CM, i even love that Mamiya RZ67II finder because it gives me 3D look, while with Hasselblad finder it can do that but not bright and not clear so i need a lot of light around and in the scene and i even need to focus and refocus hundreds of time to be sure on one subject and many times i miss it, but with RZ i get about 96% spot on, Hasselblad about 70-80%, not talking about how the Depth of field will be or look like, and if you mean to calculate the distance, well, this is not always making it easy to know the exact distance and as i said if i choose say f2.8-f4 i may miss a bit because i measured the distance wrong and not accurate, so how can you focus with your Hasselblad 500 series?



There is something in most film SLRs / medium format called a "focusing screen."  They're designed to make it easier to tell if something is in focus.  You might see a circle in the middle of the screen, and the two halves only line up if it's in focus, or something like this.

You may want a different focusing screen, or perhaps you're shooting without one.

Another poster might be able to give more detail on the different screens and their uses.


----------



## Christie Photo (Feb 17, 2011)

Vautrin said:


> There is something in most film SLRs / medium format called a "focusing screen."  They're designed to make it easier to tell if something is in focus.  You might see a circle in the middle of the screen, and the two halves only line up if it's in focus, or something like this.



Yup.  It's called split-image focusing.

Medium format finders are not as bright as 35mm and can be a challenge at times.  Beattie Intenscreen was popular, though I never used one.  Also, I never used a prism finder... mostly because of the cost.  Working with a waist level finder had me standing on a stool from much of my work.

I shot the vast majority of my portraits with an RB67 and a 180mm lens at f/8.

Good luck!

-Pete


----------



## Vautrin (Feb 17, 2011)

If you bought your hasselblad used, it's possible you may just need a focusing screen.

Usually if you are buying a used medium format, you get whatever was in the camera when they got it.  So it's entirely possible you bough a camera without a focusing screen, or perhaps with a screen but not the best one for focusing...


----------



## Mike_E (Feb 18, 2011)

It may need cleaning too.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 18, 2011)

Most waist-level finders offer a swing-up magnifying lens that greatly aids in determining the precise point of best focus. If the viewfinder screen has a split-image rangefinder device in it, I have found it helpful to gently "shake" the camera up and down, and observe if the split-image device's images wavers or wobbles, as it is positioned along a straight edge at the focus distance. If the two image halves are NOT aligned, and the camera is shaken up and down, the two image halves will waver or wobble...when the two images are in alignment, the up-and-down camera shaking movement will not cause any wobble.

You might find that an eye-level pentaprism finder aids you in focusing, by eliminating stray light.


----------



## Christie Photo (Feb 18, 2011)

Derrel said:


> I have found it helpful to gently "shake" the camera up and down, and observe if the split-image device's images wavers or wobbles, as it is positioned along a straight edge at the focus distance. If the two image halves are NOT aligned, and the camera is shaken up and down, the two image halves will waver or wobble...when the two images are in alignment, the up-and-down camera shaking movement will not cause any wobble.



Wow.  I've never seen that.  Fascinating!  Thanks, Derrel.

-Pete


----------



## Professional (Feb 18, 2011)

Thanks all.

In fact i really don't know which focusing screen to buy, i bought that Hasselblad used, and it was included with focus screen, it was not so bad but not that great as well, then i bought a used Acute-D Matte F.screen as recommended by others, for an unknown reason i found that first normal focussing screen better than the Acute-D, the Acute-D has that split-image option and the normal doesn't have, so both of those screen didn't work fine for me, but it seems both are in not good or so-so condition, and i really don't know how to clean them if it will help, but maybe that Acute-D has some kind of scratch or wear in the center of the glass and i don't think by cleaning it will solve it, and the other even it is clean i can't focus easily fine with it, i really don't know why that Mamiya RZ67II focussing screen is way better than the Hasselblad, but if there is any chance to buy a NEW focusing screen for my Hasselblad then i would be interested, i don't want to waste more on another used one, also i don't know if i should buy a 45 degree viewfinder, not sure if that may help it or not? I prefer the Waist Level in Mamiya, i also love it on Hassy but the focus screen making me to hate it maybe.


----------

