Reply if you're a real mf'er
Sorry, I only fuck Planar.
I adore my P6 but came to the realization that medium format is the worst of both worlds. If quality is the ultimate concern then I go 4x5. If not, then having a pocket 35mm that goes everywhere trumps the quality advantage of MF.
>>4482561As an aspiring 645 and or 6x6 filmfag, what's the issue? More biggur sensor/film plane better right? My understanding that digital MF is a meme because it's only like a 27% increase in surface area but 6x6 120 film is like three times larger than 35mm. Folding 645 cameras don't appear much bigger than 35mm SLRs and if factoring in lens then these cameras with their 80mm lenses or whatever are smaller than my SLR with a 70-200 attached.Genuinely, what am I overlooking fren?
>>4482562>digital MF is a memeTrue>Folding 645 cameras don't appear much bigger than 35mm SLRTrue, I wouldn't use a 35mm SLR.Not walking around holding a camera all the time became important to me, and I found the Minolta TC-1 which just goes in your pocket. This is my approach now >>4474374Don't let me deter you, MF is cool. But also remember if you're scanning, scan quality is everything. Good 35mm scans beat MF flatbed scans.
>>4482568>Thousand dollar point and shootooof. Still a saner choice than a leica>remember if you're scanning, scan quality is everything. Good 35mm scans beat MF flatbed scans.Have a 1:1 good quality macro lens and 24MP full frame camera to scan with. I'll take your word for it, but is there a site comparison or a case study or something I can read that goes into detail because I would appreciate that.I'd still like to go full square mode with a 6x6 camera.
>>4482568I for one am glad you found a nice purse camera. Do you have any images to share from it?
>>4482562Bigger film size means longer lenses for an equivalent 35mm fov, which means shallower DoF and usually generally slower shutter speeds. If you want your 120 film to actually look like medium format you will need to shoot on a tripod or have a lot of light. The bigger the film the more demanding it is of the shooter to actually know what they're doing.
>>4482574I can imagine myself going full 1950s photojournalist with the off camera sodium bulb flash honestly. I just need a good pinstripe suit and/or suspenders.
been shooting 35mm for a while and wanna try out MF, any rec's for cameras? >just spend 700 on a... no anon
>>4482575Do it. Then you can get a 4x5 press camera and a cigar as your final evolution.
Hi Frens
>>4482561Modern MF cameras are approaching the same size as 35mm.
>>4482595Modern MF cameras have sensors that are basically the same size as 35mm. They’re only about megapixels, nothing else. Not getting sharper images with better shading rendition by enlarging a less corrected, low element count lens less. Not better colors by giving deeper pixel wells more light. Just megapixels, high ISO, pixel peeping, and focus tracking. Not photography. Gear wank.
>>4482569You could substitute Rollei 35 but there's nothing like the TC-1 and you pay for it sadly. I don't know anything about DSLR scanning. I've seen good results. I do know you aren't getting the most out of a 6x6 frame (let alone bigger) by reducing it on a 35mm size sensor without stitching or pixel shift wizardry.If the 1:1 ratio appeals to you then certainly 6x6 is the way. >>4482570Here's one. The G-Rokkor is incredible >>4482574Some wise words here too, although you can definitely get good results handheld. >>4482595Like what? None of them are really pocketable to my knowledge. I'm talking pants not jacket.
>>4482599Obligatory outdated mfdb dog post. This is from a 33MP dalsa ccd sensor with a 7.2 um pixel pitch, and an 80mm rodenstock xenotar. The sensors on these are pretty close to actual 645 format.
>>4482602Too bad sensor size cant make you gamma correct betterUpgrade your screen and eyeballs
>>4482605Screen is calibrated, but I only learned recently you need to edit in adobe1998 colorspace or whatever I forget to make it look close on 4channel. Have this one taken with portra and a rolleiflex planar. :D
>>4482607Holy shit I like the photo, but please blow your negatives with a blower
>>4482599> same size as 3570% larger
i want hasselblad
>>4482610Thank you. That's where I got the doghair name from lol. I recently spent a lot of money on a mistral 3 drying cabinet(15 minute drying time is incredible), I disassembled my scanner to remove built up dust, and I started using distilled water in my final rinse and photo flo. Dust problems have finally been SOLVED.Have a cat and some really pleasant skin tones. Same roll as dog pic.
>>4482612>crop factor… 1.25Lol not medium format
>>4482610>anons first time encountering doghair-chanIt’s cute to witness. Wait til you see his egg phase
>>4482625Still life phase, actually. My recent dried roses wetplate is a banger I will not hear otherwise.
>>4482628more like mid life crisis amirite-Dale, ex USMC, dog dad, AR15 operator—-~~~RIDE FREE OR DIE HARD===Ask me about my HASSELBLAD
Shot with a graflex xlsw and horseman 6x9 back. Extremely fun camera to use.>>4482644Jokes on you I don't own a hasselblad, nerd. I've been a photography enjoyer for years and just found a camera and genre that interests me and provides me with a really good challenge.Having creative outlets in life is important and mine is primarily making still lifes, taking pics of them, and then making prints. It's fun, relaxing, and after keeping at it for so long I am getting a lot better. FACT.
>>4482619Then you'll have to tripfag, we will not recognise you otherwise
>>4482568>>4482601Why not the Olympus XA, Minox 35, MJU, or even the Tiara? At least they're less of a liability >>4482556Enjoy your balsam separation
i remember there was a medium format thread a while back. iirc there wasn't really much going on because all the posters who shoot mf already post their pics normally>>4482621the common definition of medium format is anything between 35mm and large format. do you have a better classification?
>>4482651Never would I ever.
>>4482653I haven't used any of those. The XA looks solid, those others are pretty limited. TC-1 has a spot meter, focus distance readout, aperture control, set ISO, slow sync flash - all super useful to me. I think the reliability thing is people buying trashed (Near Mint+++) copies from our friends in Japan.
>>4482678The xa is something of a fools gold, imo. The lens can be quite sharp, but the rf is so small and fiddly it’s not exactly a joy to use, the camera itself seems to just e made for small Japanese hands in general, the shutter button is on a feather trigger and you can easily accidentally set it off. It likes to grind up some films with thicker base(multiple copies have done this for me) and a few other quirks. If you can work around them it can be a pretty decent little camera but I don’t pick mine up as much, the size benefit isn’t enough to overcome some of the other niggles when I can just grab my CL or something.
>>4482682Good to know, once the TC-1 is toast I'm going Rollei 35s. Sonnar tonality and rendition is my cup of tea.
just copped a c330 last week with 80 and 135mm lenses, been shooting on trix and portra and just dropped off two rolls to be developed what is everyone using to meter light? im not experienced enough with film to trust myself to calculate sunny 16 yet so ive been using an app on my phone, should i invest in a real meter or can i trust the app? i guess ill know for sure when i get the scans but id like to know what others use
>>4483220Yeah get a real meter. A spot meter if you can afford it. Phone light meters are kinda doodoo and should be calibrated with a real one. If you shoot b&w you'll be close enough.
>>4483220m 6x6 doesn't have a meter so i just use a second camera that has a meter to set exposure.
>>4483225i compared the app metering to what i was getting for exposure from a digital camera and they were relatively closei dont have a film camera with a real meter so ill probably pick up a real one like >>4483224 suggested
>>4483228huh? you can meter with a digital camera as well.. it doesn't need to be a film camera
>>4483220Check eBay you can snipe some deals from time to time. I snagged this little guy (revenilabs meter) for 30 bucks. It’s a bit fiddly at first but it matches my sekonic more or less and is less of a pain to bring around than the sekonic lol
>>4483229I meter on iPhone…
Am I seeing this right? You can just switch what format you're shooting on the fly?Why the fuck is this not more popular? This seems awesome. Would I be retarded to go through with buying this?
>>4483318Because it doesn't use a frame-spacing mechanism, and you need to slowly inch the film forward until you see the numbers in the red window Picrel is a camera I wish to print when I have time, always wanted a GX617
>>4482602>>4482599Modern MF sensors are the same size as a 127 film frame, this film size is considered the smallest of "medium format" and was used mostly on mini TLRs like the Yashica 44
>>4483318Sinar zoom film back does that, but actually what you're thinking.
>>4483341>film back>$500+Fuck me.Is there a way to do medium format without spending as much as my main digital kit over again? My 35mm SLR was fuckin $30
>>4483344120 was basically a professionals only format back when it was actually used. Most of it is kinda or really expensive by nature just like medium format digital.If you don't mind sacrificing portability I would suggest just going straight to 4x5, honestly. Sometimes you can find full kits for like 300 bucks on ebay.
>>4483344That one is only expensive because it is an uncommon/rare variant. Regular backs for mamiya press are cheap and plentiful. Just as an example. But it is still pricier than you’d first think though no way around it
>>4483344>was fuckin $30A Seagull 4B-I :^)
>>4482553from summermy Rolleiflex 3.5T, good stuffThis Zeiss Tessar is always super sharp in the middle, sharp in the whole frame at f/11 which is anyway widest aperture I use for landscape
>>4483344you ca find Horseman 6x9 film back for 100 - 150
>>4483344If you buy a 6x7 Bronica GS-1, you can also get 6x6 and 645 backs for it. If you buy a 6x6 Bronica SQ-A, you can also get 645 and 135 pano (this one is $$$) for it.
got a tilt shift adapter for hasselblad to sony e mount so i can do 2-shot panoramics with the medium format lens and splice together in photoshop. ive shot some stuff but havent gotten around to putting them together yet. anyone have experience doing this? am i retarded?
>>4483434i think it was the photomerge option
>>4483318I have one of these K backs for my Mamiya Universal, and it is nice to have a back that can do multiple formats, but keep in mind its essentially a 6x9 back that accepts masks for the 6x6 and 6x4.5 formats. So if the masks aren't included you're just left with a 6x9 back without automatic frame spacing.
>>4483434I used to do it with my 5D2 and 24mm TSE when I used to shoot Canon. Worked pretty nicely.
>>4483375based Tessar enjoyer
Feels good to be an mfer
Medium format looks like 45mp digital with sharpening turned off tbdesuVery soulless format
>>4483586Is this Amsterdam?
>>4483633nigga the giant sign literally says welcome to utrecht.
>>4483314i can't understand how what you're saying follows from what i'm saying
>>4483707It doesn’t, I was high as a kite.
>>4482581find whatever shitter tlr you can in a thrift store here's a garbage test shot I took with a filthy ikoflex I found and broke the slow speed engagement of
>>4482582full weegee-tation
>>4483229nice cock
>>4483761Based and pill pilled
What went wrong here? The first exposure is out of focus and in bad lighting but the fourth one is fine, the rest however are completely unexposed, I checked functionality before I shot the roll and after I got this disaster back and the shutter fires reliably, the film is completely unexposed so its not a light leak or a blown out roll and I couldn't have left the lens cap on because its a tlr and I wouldn't have been able to frame shitI don't think I'm just wildly under exposing because I use a shitty meter and two images I have are at least visible, I think I could have maybe loaded the film wrong but I followed the instructions (lined up the arrow consistently etc) and I know its not the lab I sent it too because two of the images exist It has to be a shutter problem but one that I'm only experiencing when the camera is loaded because otherwise it fires just fineI'm more pissed because I got impatient and shot another roll while this one was being developed so I'm going to have another shitshow on my handsI knew the images were gonna be bad because I've never done this before but this is horrendous lol
>>4484050Sometimes the mechanism that tracks what frame you're on will get stuck and it'll keep winding past the frame you should be on. The mechanism works different ways in different cameras, some have a wheel that measures the amount of film, others measure how much the spool turns. If there is a window you can run a test roll (or even just backing paper with no film) through and see if the numbers on the back are close to the number on the frame counter.
>>4484054But then he would have some wildly spaced exposures unless blud actually took two shots and retardedly just kept winding
>>4484054Mine has a counter that will stop the crank from turning once it lines up the new frame, I assume that part is working right because I took 12 shots and the frames that are visible are non consecutive and in correct alignmentI'm going to bring the thing in to a store and have them look at it and I can ask them of they think there could be a problem with the winding but Im pretty positive its a sticky shutter or something wrong with the part of the mechanism that cocks the shutter
>>4484060TLR‘s are pretty simple, you should be able to physically see the shutter working just by cracking the back open and holding it up to light. And even so it’s pretty uncommon to have a shutter won’t open issue more than a shutter won’t close issue. And since you’re negative or blank that tells me that the shutter didn’t open so maybe you weren’t winding it properly or something. But that doesn’t make sense because if you didn’t wind it properly, you wouldn’t have a proper Actuation when you tripped the shutter. You can physically hear and feel it. Yeah shit’s fucked man I don’t know.
>>4484050took the roll out to respool later to see if i could find the issue turns out >>4484054 was right, the camera is only meant to wind four times before it shows the first frame on the counter, then two revolutions between each frame, however as ive been messing with it it will wind sometimes up to seven times before showing the 1 in the window and between frames it will wind only once or even three or four times before the lever locks and the counter shows the next frame, my dumbass never caught it and i burned two rolls of film lolgonna try to get the seller to repair is since they offer a return policy and claimed it passed a qc check as fully functional
>>4484082I’ve had that issue on a rolleicord and a yashica d. Basically the “catch” for the gear is on a spring mechanism and with time the grease and gunk dry up and the springs lose tension, and it doesn’t “return” as it should. My yashica d wouldn’t reset to 0, only 2 or 3, and the rolleicord would have the same behaviour you say, intermittent counting. Should be a simple fix for any decent shop.
On a mamiya tlr you can focus incredibly close to a subject because of the bellows, the closer you get the lower the bar in the viewfinder, which I assume is to indicate parallax, gets however on a 135mm lens I have when I frame the image below the indicator the photos come out far too low in the frame, portraits I take with a persons face centered have their face cut in half with the top of their head in the center, is this bar not for parallax and only for exposure compensation? And if so how do I compensate for parallax without that gay ass add on to a tripod mamiya sells?
>>4484450If you have a tripod with an adjustable center you could mark two spots that correlate to each lens position.Or you could get an SLR like god intended. You're putting a round peg in a square hole if you're trying to do close focus using anything with parallax problems.
>>4482561I just disagree it's literallythe medium of both world. Better qualitythan 35, much much more portable than LF. Scanning is the real meme. You can print MF way waybigger than 135, as big as you could possible you need, there's a reason it's so common even today in magazine photography.
>>4483220I've found phone meters to be prettyaccurate if you use them properly. I would practice shooting by eye though it doesn't take that long to get the hang of it, but mb not on MF. I'd save up for a proper spot meter, old meters are gonna be probablyless accurate than your phone.
>>4483344Old press cameras. If you look around you can get them for less than $100USD, and there are other deals out there too. Also the lubitel can actuallytake prettynice photos.
posting some stuff from my plaubel makina 670 since moving to norway
>>4484490
>>4484490picture of my husband at home. portra 160nc. looks like it may have some xray damage?
>>4484490right now it’s super hard to not see things like a tourist. in america i had a perspective that i wanted my images to communicate. i’m sure that comes with time, but do any anons have suggestions about how to look and *see* in unfamiliar places?
>>4484490back when i thought my camera had a light leak but i was just being retarded when trying to reel the film on patterson reels (i prefer the metal ones)
>>4484490some very expired portra vc from america
>>4484490rock formation from helvete potholes in norway
>>4484490back when my husband was jacked, helvete potholes expired portra
>>4484490from the støl after we got married last august
>>4484491>>4484492>>4484494I really like these Nice set, if a bit homoerotic. You're lucky anon
>>4484500tusen takk :) i really miss taking photos of people (here w rz67), but im still not familiar with anyone except him and his parents. nordmenn are a little standoffish. i’d pursue landscapes, but 80mm isn’t my favorite focal length for those. so now i wait and save my money.
>>4484498>never should've come here!!!
>>4484499nice shot getting the sunstar without ttl. and nice set
>>4484501I remember >>4484495nice to see more photos of yours. I really like the homo short short aesthetics on homos. It just suits them. Thanks for sharing, looking forward to seeing your portraits of the locals once you have integrated.
i think im going to need my own scanner bros, the one the shop in my city uses is absolute shit
>>4486214>shitty photo of nothingseems about right
>>4486232>shitty post of nothingseems about right for a nophoto
>>4486214>I shoot analog>yes, I just like it better. digital is too clinical>what do you mean "mental illness"? just because I digitize my negatives?get help
>>4486250what did he mean by this?
>>4486250Better than using a snoy
tried taking some festive photos and most of them turned out like shiti think i overestimated how slow shutter speeds at iso 400 really are, i need some of that cinestill 800t for indoors methinks
>>4487658Just push B&W if you're going to a Christmas market. Cinestill 800T isn't even meant to be rated at 800, it's just to astroturf zoomers who don't compensate metering for high contrast scenes e.g. gas stations at night
>>4482553
>>4487728bald
