# Vintage Question for Vintage Photographers



## Rodenstock (Mar 16, 2013)

Let's say it's 1975-1978.  You're starting out as a studio and wedding photograher and you're not rich. You hope to eventually pick up some commercial work with industry.

What medium format camera would you choose if you could afford only one such camera?  

Would a 120 square (6x6) do the job?

If not, what format would you choose?  

What would be three good camera choices (maker and model) in that format if you were limited to the used-camera market?

The guy already has a good 35 mm, but he knows he needs something larger for the kind of work he's going to be doing.

This is history, I know.  Thanks for your input.


----------



## BrianV (Mar 16, 2013)

Most wedding photographers that I knew used 35mm Nikon F2 and 6x6 Hasselblad or Bronica SLR's. The 6x6 used in the studio and formal wedding portraits, the 35mm for posed wedding shots after the ceremony, and for informal shots at the reception.


----------



## Helen B (Mar 16, 2013)

I remember TLRs being used quite a lot by wedding photographers - usually Rolleiflex or Mamiya C33, C220 and C330. I don't recall any wedding photographer using 35 mm for anything other than candids, but 6x6 was often used for those as well and they weren't all that common. 35 mm would have been considered low quality then for wedding work, which was mostly formals and other posed shots. More upscale wedding photographers would have used Hasselblads or Rolleiflex SL66s (more in Europe). 4x5 was sometimes used, but 6x6 was more common.

Speaking personally, I borrowed a pair of Hasselblads from my mentor until I bought my own second-hand Mamiya Press (6x9) system, which I used for industrial photography, along with an ex-War Department 4x5 kit, which I used for portraiture (early 70's rather than late 70's).


----------



## cgw (Mar 17, 2013)

The Bronica ETR(Si) became very popular for its fast handling, flash sync flexibility, good glass and 30 shots/220 roll. An elderly friend used these almost exclusively for his wedding business back in the day and loved 'em.


----------



## Patrice (Mar 17, 2013)

I was a pretty active amateur in those days, my two tools of choice were a Rolleiflex TLR plus a C330 and a couple of lenses.


----------



## Helen B (Mar 17, 2013)

cgw said:


> The Bronica ETR(Si) became very popular for its fast handling, flash sync flexibility, good glass and 30 shots/220 roll. An elderly friend used these almost exclusively for his wedding business back in the day and loved 'em.



I remember when the plain ETR came out. Wouldn't they have been a bit new for 75 to 78? The Si version didn't come out until 10 years later.


----------



## BrianV (Mar 17, 2013)

I paid my way through college working in a camera shop those years. We sold a lot of gear, 2% commission and $4/hr paid for my tuition and living expenses.  It was also the time when a lot of my friends were getting married. Like today, there was a wide spread of wedding packages available, including "JC Penney" providing full wedding packages.

Are you looking to pick up some vintage gear, or just curious?


----------



## cgw (Mar 17, 2013)

Helen B said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > The Bronica ETR(Si) became very popular for its fast handling, flash sync flexibility, good glass and 30 shots/220 roll. An elderly friend used these almost exclusively for his wedding business back in the day and loved 'em.
> ...



Nope. Three versions: ETR, ETRs, ETRSi. Believe the ETR was mid-70s.


----------



## BrianV (Mar 17, 2013)

"The Bronica ETR, Never has so much been so little". From an advertisement in Pop Photo, Oct 1976.

I remember being steered away from the Bronica S and S2- reliability issues. I think it was the S2a that was more reliable, I seem to remember it goinf to steel gears rather than brass?


----------



## cgw (Mar 17, 2013)

BrianV said:


> "The Bronica ETR, Never has so much been so little". From an advertisement in Pop Photo, Oct 1976.
> 
> I remember being steered away from the Bronica S and S2- reliability issues. I think it was the S2a that was more reliable, I seem to remember it goinf to steel gears rather than brass?



Picked up an ancient beater Bronica S for almost nothing. Shot about 20 rolls before the gears went. Trashed it and got a mint Bronica SQ-B. Nikkor lenses were very sweet on the old S series.

Noisy, beautifully-made mechanical beasts with slow sync speeds thanks to the FP shutter.


----------



## Helen B (Mar 17, 2013)

Feels more like research for a story/movie set at that time. The ETR-Si is definitely way too late to fit into a 75-78 period and the ETR-S is just a little too late. I think that if the guy is on a budget and looking to buy used, the ETR is also likely to be too new for him/her as it wasn't introduced until '76 (which we all seem to agree on). Many people liked the older Bronicas such as the S2a in general for the Nikon lenses, however. Just my opinion thinking back to the mid 70's and being a young-ish pro on a budget then myself.


----------



## bsinmich (Mar 17, 2013)

Back in the 60's and 70's I did a lot of weddings with Yashica TLRs and Honeywell strobes.  I always carried a spare camera but only needed it one time.  I still have a couple of those and just put a new set of batteries in the Honeywell 770.  I have 2 of them also, with 4 battery packs and 2 of them working.  I started workiing  for Gem Stores studio, the early version of Costco and Sam's Club, and then went independent.  One wedding I also ended up being the organist.


----------



## Ysarex (Mar 17, 2013)

I worked at a big camera store back then -- we were the regions prime supplier for the wedding industry. Back then the wedding photographers shot primarily medium format 6x6. There were a some odd out that shot 6x7/9. The square shooters were heavy into Rolleiflex and Mamiya's twin lens (C-220). The better more established studios shot Hassy. Those three just noted made up more than half of what was used. 6x4.5 was up and coming with the Bronica and Mamiya offerings. The rectangle shooters had old Graflex-XL systems and Mamiya Press cameras and don't forget the good old Koni-Omega (cheap, but the big neg covered over many flaws).

Back then everyone knew Hassy was the way to go, but many choked on the price.

Joe


----------



## Rodenstock (Mar 17, 2013)

Thanks to all for your responses.

Yes, Helen, fictional story in progress here.  I try to be accurate in the use of props.

I was active myself with the lower end TLR's at that time, but never  gave much attention to what studio or wedding photographers used because  in my work the Rolleicord V or Mamiya C220 gave satisfactory results.

Must  admit, I'm surprised to learn that at least a few wedding photographers  were using similar equipment. When I asked I expected to hear more  about the larger formats.

It's been fun, hearing about all of  your experiences. I went upstairs and opened the old ammo boxes and  started exercising shutters.  Who knows, maybe I'll end up sniffing   Microdol and D-76 again.

Brian, I could possibly see myself  getting interested in the older rectangular 6x cameras, but not knowing  beans about them, I don't plan on rushing in soon.

bsinmich, if you also cook and tie knots in addition to working cameras and playing music, you'd be much in demand in my part of the woods.


----------



## IanG (Mar 18, 2013)

During bthat period I used a pair of Mamiyas a C33 and a C3, they got used a lot for portraits and ocassional weddings, also some other commercial work, but I was also shooting 5x4 with a large wholeplate/half plate/5x4 De vere monorail.

Mamiya TLR's were probably the most common cameras usewd in portrait studios and by wedding photographers followed by Hasselblads and Bronica's usually the S2a, slightly less flexible some used Rolleiflex.

Like Helen says 35mm was not very commonly used by commercial photographers, some I I know never used them at all, however press photographers by then were predominantly using 35mm.

Ian


----------

