I have only one 35mm camera now (a zorki). I use it from time to time and won't stop using it as 35mm pictures have their own charms and characteristics which would be difficult to duplicate with a medium format camera (grain, roundish perspective, e.g. pictures of Salgado, Robert Frank...) .
I just realize writing this post that I'm seriously addicted to film photography.
I thought I was cured of GAS but I bought a nice pentax 67 with its wooden handle two weeks ago.
Did I need it? No. I have already many medium format cameras (Mamiya 7ii, a C330, super 23, Moskvas, holga...) but medium format is so addictive (and our kiwi currency is so strong nowadays). The quality of the pictures, the variety of format size 6x6 6x7 & 6x9, the great feeling of the body in your hands, the ayimam red mark on your neck at the end of the day...
I often recommend people interested in film photography to start with medium format instead of 35mm for the same reasons.
I also shoot 5x7. I try to use large format as often as I can but it is hardly compatible with my family life.
It is such an effort to shoot large format that when I succeed to make a nice picture, it gives me an immense satisfaction!
To keep myself well tuned I use both MF & LF formats on alternating weeks. I'd fallen out of practice a bit with the MF for awhile and now with the LF E-6 vacillation I use the MF a lot more again. So, it's a good idea to retain usage of your various platforms if you've got access to them. One never knows what film type or size will not be available as time goes by.......:confused:
It happens. I fell in love with Bronica until I met Rolleiflex SL66, then I was apostate, a regular bad, badn boy and now have two. Very expensive. Just like a trophy wife. Which I have occassionally luisted for but never played with.... oh well
Same here. I havent shot with my 35mm camera in nearly 9 months. I have many bricks of Neopan 400 on ice but never shoot it. All because I cannot pick up the 35mm camera in place of my medium format gear. I just can't do it.
Yes, the image quality jump from 35mm to MF is hugebut the jump from MFto 4x5 is disappointing.In my mind MF give the biggest bang for the buck.It's my favorite format and always has been.
I shoot my 35mm when I want grain images. I don't shoot much colour with it, mostly BW photos. Most of my colour is shot on MF.
The image quality of MF and the affordable equipment is very nice. I'm happy with only 12 shots per roll too (in 6x6 format) In the pre-digital days, I drooled over MF equipment while using 35mm gear. Now the equipment is affordable, image quality good, etc... It's a good time to enjoy MF. I rarely use my 35mm gear either. I pulled the batteries from it so they wouldn't corrode in the 35mm camera.
I do LF as well, not so much for the image quality but so I can use old lenses and old styles and have big negatives for contact printing, alt process, etc...
I like LF as well as MF and alternate back and forth depending on what I'm after for results. If I want 1950's looking results, MF TLR does well. If I want hundred year ago pictorialism look or thin DOF or crazy nice portraits, LF is hard to beat.
i sometimes shoot glass paper and metal negatives in 35mm cameras
but they are easier to work with in larger formats. one of my favorites
is 3a (postcard) 3.5x5.75 (i think?) nice and long. its like a mini version of 7x11
I still use my Leica M6 anywhere extra speed and mobility is absolutely needed, but even that wonderful Zeiss glass can't match a 6x7 negative!
Wait, you have two very expensive trophy wives?? :-)
Originally Posted by whlogan
I was fortunate to start with medium format, but I keep finding there are miniature format cameras I just can't give up. Why didn't they think to make the Contax rangefinders in 6x9? (I suppose the closest thing is Fuji's Texas Leicas, but I want my Sonnars!)