Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,727   Posts: 1,515,188   Online: 959
      
Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 94
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,576
    Images
    27
    Pamela,
    Same as everyone else, though I wish the negative was still larger. I have a Mamiya 645 (original, non-remmoveable back) and wish I could switch backs. Also, JDEF is right on (I think he is using an RB or RZ 67) which has a rotating back - only one with that feature I think - anyone? Have started working with a Crown Graphic, 4x5, and really love the big negative. So, before you make the jump, looking into one of these you can get a roll film back for it. The prices are falling so don't limit yourself - if you can get your hands on several different kinds of cameras do so. Also, consider the darkroom side of things - enlarger, etc.

    Good luck and enjoy..
    Mike C

    Rambles

  2. #12
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,135
    Images
    20
    Why did I first get into MF from 35mm?--Bigger neg and richer tonality.

    Why do I keep my MF system now that I shoot large format?--Functionality of an SLR with a bigger neg than 35mm. I also have a couple of MF folders that I like for their portability and classic lenses, as well as a TLR that I like for its lens and the fact that it's quieter and less obtrusive than an SLR.

  3. #13
    glbeas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Roswell, Ga. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    109
    Why? It's what I started with and it just feels right. 35mm was a second choice that replaced medium format film for a long time for cost and convenience reasons but as soon as I could afford it I went back to 2 1/4 film. And with my eyesight getting worse the large negs are a pretty nice thing to look at!
    Gary Beasley

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Mass, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    113
    My main reson is bigger a negative. It gives much better quality than 35mm, but still has the flexibility of being hand held and using roll film (compared to 4x5).

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    Because I wanted people to ask me if that was a Hasselblad, no one ever did. They all asked me what kind of digital camera was that. Of course, as soon as I pulled out the Linhof 4x5, they all asked me if it was a Hasselblad......

    Joking aside, I found the Hassleblad to fit, I loved the lenses, and as was mentioned before, when I am in the mood for snapshots, it delivers quality from a handheld camera.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    1,638
    Images
    5
    Good Evening, Pamela,

    As many above have noted, the biggest reason is the improved print quality from the larger negative.

    Actually, I started with a Ricohflex TLR when I was doing yearbook photography in high school. Unfortunately, I had no darkroom then and did no printing. After college, I bought a new 35mm SLR (that style was "in" then) and used it happily until I set up a darkroom several years later. I was greatly disappointed by the print quality from 35mm negatives; of course, Tri-X was big then, but so was the grain it produced in prints. Plus-X was bearable, but I never could come to like it. (Where was T-Max when I needed it?)

    In a photo store one day, I bought, on impluse, an old Ansco Speedex folding camera. After printing the first 120 negatives, I knew that MF was for me. I went on to other TLR's, a Mamiya Super 23, a miniature Speed Graphic, the Koni-Omega system I still use, and, recently a Fuji 6 x 7 rangefinder. Overall, my preference in MF is 6 x 7 or larger. Naturally, all this soon led also to 4 x 5 . . .

    It all comes down to print quality. Getting a good print from 35mm is work; the larger negatives make everything a lot easier.

    Konical

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Huntsville, Alabama (Rocket City USA)
    Posts
    230
    Images
    6
    Bigger negatives, for sure. The allure of some of the old folding cameras. However, as another poster noted, when I looked down into the viewfinder of a Yashica Mat, I was hooked.

    An unexpected plus: the pleasure of working with leaf shutters. They're quiet, no mirror slapping around, and they open up a whole new world of possibilities when using a flash!

    Doug
    "If You Push Something Hard Enough, It Will fall over" - Fudd's First Law of Opposition

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Oregon
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    59
    Thanks for the wealth of responses and for sharing your stories, experiences, thoughts, advice, reasons ...

    I did rent a Hasselblad 503CW this weekend. Unfortunately, it had the winder and prism, but it gave me a good idea. It definitely required me to slow things down a bit, I often use the wrong number (from my new-to-me Luna Pro S light meter -- I'd use the light meter reading rather than the EV), I forgot to change the ASA on the prism, so figuring out DOF was crazy ... But there was something awesome (as in inspiring awe) about it; I felt quite serious! I was more careful about choosing each shot. I'll look forward to seeing the results & then will know for sure. Either way, I appreciate your stories and look forward to hearing more!

  9. #19
    Adrian Twiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Wigan (oop North) United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    611
    Images
    10
    I got into MF in quite a roundabout way. When I started photography when I was about 17 I used the darkroom at the photographic society I joined. The 35mm enlargers were not very good so I used to work with a little used Opemus 6. Although the large negative carrier was easy to use with 35mm the sheer size of it intrigued me. A few months later I was passing my local camera store and saw a Yashicmat for sale at a very reasonable price. I bought it and after a few films was hooked. It mattered not that I could not change lenses or had to use a separate light meter. In fact the single lens forced me to look critically at composistion and making the best of what I had and the separate light meter made me think more carefully about exposure. But what really made an impression was the shear quality of the negatives both in terms of sharpness and tonality. I must admit that it took me many years before my vision matured sufficiently to fully appreciate, what I consider to be the superior tonality of the larger negative but the apparent improvement in sharpness was immediately apparent. Ironically although most of my medium format cameras have been 6x6 I never made square prints. This is something I intent to explore in the future (albeit some 30 years after starting with MF)

  10. #20
    Les McLean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Northern England on the Scottish border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,610
    MF negatives properly exposed and processed will enable you to make reasonably sized prints that approach the quality of LF. In addition some offer the flexiblity of having individual interchangable backs for normal, plus and minus devlelopment, a big bonus IMO. I have 5 backs for my Mamiya 645 just in case I need to deal with extreme contrast and have to give more than one stop plus or minus development. Consider carefully your intention to buy Hasselblad, IMO they are grossly over rated and very over priced.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin