Originally Posted by Dr Croubie
lol! Sounds good, doc. In practice though, fraught with confusion and difficulty. A literal fumblefest.
- Shutter will remain open once triggered, and when battery is removed; requires reset with mirror lock-up reset button (front of 67) before re-inserting battery, then wind on. This is clumsy. I am studying a workaround involving triggering the camera with the mirror lock-up reset button, then shutter.
- Neither of the 67 leaf shutter tele lenses are suitable for star trails really (way too long; ultra-wide angles are the go).
- Mirror lock-up is not useable with the 165mm LS; some souls have tried it. The mirror jams.
Yes, I have in the past balanced all from 135 to 8x10. The secret was to standardize the post process. Kits of course are different but not much. As the format got larger, your requirements for sturdier tripods and light meters increased. Once you set up a kit though, you just need to do a 'day of shoot' edit to determine what you need for a particular assignment. Not brain surgery.
That said, the trusty Nikon Fm2 sits on a shelf most trips these days. My days of HCB inspiration are long over. If I just need an image, the Fuji Digital will do the trick a lot faster than the Nikon with little or any decay in image quality. Only issue is freaking shutter trip delay.
As far as MF, I have spent a lot of time and a lot of miles all over the country with the weight of my rb on my shoulder, with some spectacular days in the US South West, Paris France, the lowlands of Europe, the Pacific coast, River Road Plantations in Louisiana, etc... But... my style of shooting has changed. When I go out for images these days, the setup for MF isn't that much easier than LF. Still need a tripod, still need a meter. As such, my drive has been towards utilizing my LF (4x5 - 8x10) equipment. The end result justifies the exertion. As I get older, I look around and realize after I am gone, having 7000 unprinted MF negatives makes no sense.
300 or 400 LF negatives that please me so much more is all the reward I am ever going to have and frankly, all I need. So I now concentrate on keeping the Deardorff tuned up, mounting a few more process lenses, and actually getting out. The Mamiya still sits around for the day I change my mind.
Good luck on your search.
tim in san jose
Where ever you are, there you be.
A couple of years ago, I set a goal for myself - reduce my gear to two or three 4x5 cameras and a handful of lenses. I never quite achieved that goal but, I did get rid of most all of my excess and I do really only use three 4x5 cameras anymore (even though that leaves a few to collect dust.). I recently bought a nice 645 camera and it has replaced all small and medium format gear.
Here's the thing...before I slimmed down, I had too many choices...and it was often more than a little paralyzing.
It may seem counter intuitive but, having fewer gear choices really is liberating.
That's the beauty of the Rollei, to me... the only choice is to take it or not. Everything else is simplicity and it forces you to concentrate on taking the photo, not fiddling with formats or lenses. I feel like it has clarified a lot of my photography for me and made me a better photographer because it makes me think about each image. Don't get me wrong there is definitely a place for having choices. But I feel like now if I were told I had to give up all my cameras but one, I could be happier with that decision now.
Originally Posted by BradS
For me it is about selecting the right tool for the job; 35mm, MF, LF, digital.
I was recently on a LF outing. The 4x5 monorail + tripod was TOO HEAVY to lug around, I was exhausted before the end of the day, and because I was tired, I did not shoot as much as I would have. And being middle-age does not help. I cannot lug around what I used to easily lug around when I was younger. So next time, if it will be significant walking distance from the car, unless I have a cart/wagon, I'm taking the MF and NOT the LF camera. My 4x5 is now restricted to the home studio or a reasonably short distance from the car.
A MF 6x6 or 6x9 would be my idea of a the biggest camera that I would walk about with.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I find that my shots with 35mm have a totally different "look" than MF. Or, I get shots w/ 35mm that are impossible to get w/ a larger, slower camera. Maybe it would be different if I had a fast MF camera w/ AF and AE, but since I prefer the look of older German glass that isn't going to happen. My Leica R 90 lens gives me IQ that is at least as good as MF, probably better in many instances. The extra reach, and small size of the Nikon camera that it's on, means you get shots that would not be possible w/ a Rolleicord or MF folder. Of course, 6x6 negs are a lot easier to work with in a darkroom, and you can get far bigger enlargements. That's probably the priority of MF vs 35mm. How big are you going to enlarge your photos, and does grain bother you in those enlargements?
For me, i currently uses both 35mm and Medium Format. One for fast shooting and the other for normal shoot. If I have a Crown Graphic or a Speed Graphic which is as portable as Medium Format cameras, i will probably give up Medium Format. =D