Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-26-2017, 02:54 PM   #1
Veteran Member
reivax's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: California
Posts: 826
Is Medium Format Worth It?

I know this is an incredibly subjective question, but I've been wanting medium format for a while now. The depth of field on portraits is really what keeps me coming back to look. There is also just something about that look that is achieved that is incredible. I've been playing around with the Brenizer Method on my K-1 and while the results are pretty cool, the insane file sizes are just too much for me and my computer to handle. There's no way I could afford a 645D, let alone a 645Z, but those older film cameras are really tempting.

The problem is, I know nothing about film cameras. I own a couple of FF film cameras, but don't use them (not even sure they work, I got them when I ordered some vintage lenses). Medium Format film cameras look like a lot to take in, but I'd be willing to learn if it is "worth it". I'd probably be looking into a 645n or nii if I went medium format (because digital is out of my price range).

Any advice and guidance would be greatly appreciated.

12-26-2017, 03:20 PM   #2
Pentaxian
murrelet's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 506
The market for the 645 is seems good, so if you decide it's not for you, you shouldn't have a problem selling and recovering all or most of what you paid. Looking at it that way, it's almost risk-free to try it out, other than your time and buying a few rolls of film and processing. The leap from 35mm to 120 isn't so great from a user standpoint, especially if you're jumping in with a 645N. I recently started shooing 120 after a year and a half shooting 35mm and I'm loving it. It will be a bigger leap switching from digital to film. If you've developed the habit of being selective and careful with your shooting then you'll be fine. But if you fire off a couple hundred frames every shoot then it will be a hard adjustment when you only have 16 shots on a roll of 120.
12-26-2017, 03:24 PM   #3
Veteran Member
reivax's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: California
Posts: 826
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by murrelet Quote
The market for the 645 is seems good, so if you decide it's not for you, you shouldn't have a problem selling and recovering all or most of what you paid. Looking at it that way, it's almost risk-free to try it out, other than your time and buying a few rolls of film and processing. The leap from 35mm to 120 isn't so great from a user standpoint, especially if you're jumping in with a 645N. I recently started shooing 120 after a year and a half shooting 35mm and I'm loving it. It will be a bigger leap switching from digital to film. If you've developed the habit of being selective and careful with your shooting then you'll be fine. But if you fire off a couple hundred frames every shoot then it will be a hard adjustment when you only have 16 shots on a roll of 120.


A big part of the allure of shooting film is that I don’t feel I’m meticulous enough with digital. I really wish I would have started out with film. Way too often, I don’t notice little details because I know it’s digital and I can snap a hundred shots and not worry about it. I feel like shooting film would be a great learning experience for me.
12-26-2017, 03:32 PM   #4
Veteran Member
amoringello's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Virginia, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,562
What is the end usage? i.e. do you have a good scanner? Do you have a way to print, as it sounds like you won't be scanning to use digital files?

Paying someone else to scan and/or print can be very costly.
I think the places near me will charge about $20-$30 to drum scan anything larger than 35mm. They drum scan, because that is how they make the prints (no more enlargers).
That cost is per image and on top of development cost, if you don't do that yourself. That price includes an 8x10 print as well, I believe.
But at $3 or less to print an 8x10 most anywhere, the cost of medium format is pretty high if you don't own the equipment to do the start-to-finish work yourself.

If you can find a place that can develop and print the old fashioned way, that would be much cheaper, of course.

Just sayin, look into what the total cost might end up being for you. The cheaper medium format film camera may not be as fun as it sounds once you start pricing out the end result.
Hopefully your area has better options.

12-26-2017, 03:47 PM   #5
Veteran Member
reivax's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: California
Posts: 826
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by amoringello Quote
What is the end usage? i.e. do you have a good scanner? Do you have a way to print, as it sounds like you won't be scanning to use digital files?

Paying someone else to scan and/or print can be very costly.
I think the places near me will charge about $20-$30 to drum scan anything larger than 35mm. They drum scan, because that is how they make the prints (no more enlargers).
That cost is per image and on top of development cost, if you don't do that yourself. That price includes an 8x10 print as well, I believe.
But at $3 or less to print an 8x10 most anywhere, the cost of medium format is pretty high if you don't own the equipment to do the start-to-finish work yourself.

If you can find a place that can develop and print the old fashioned way, that would be much cheaper, of course.

Just sayin, look into what the total cost might end up being for you. The cheaper medium format film camera may not be as fun as it sounds once you start pricing out the end result.
Hopefully your area has better options.
I was thinking about buying a scanner. Maybe the Epson v600.
12-26-2017, 04:03 PM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,294
If you want something to give you results similar to Brenizer stitching, have a look at a Pentax 67 with the 105/2.4. I'd venture to guess that a majority of images posted online made with that combo are with the lens wide open. Sure seems like it. Or maybe the Mamiya 645 80/1.9. Compare what you find to what you (or others) get with a 50/1.2 on the K-1 and see if it is different enough that you still want to try medium format film.
12-26-2017, 05:39 PM - 1 Like   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsø, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,031
Depth of field: Medium format lenses in general have smaller apertures then their FF counterparts. If you like the DoF on medium format, just stop down your FF lens to match the DoF.

Sensitivity: Film is way worse then digital. Even when comparing 6x7 film vs FF digital. Some like the "natural" look of the grains, almost like some music lovers like the scratches and noise from LPs over the "sterile" CD sound.

Resolution: 6x7 film may have an advantage in some cases over 645D/Z, at low ISO, but then again, FF digital with pixel shift resolution is even harder to beat. 645D and Z dont have pixel shift resolution.

In my opinion I would want a selection of f/1,4 645 lenses or f/2,0 6x7 lenses before I even considered medium format. What makes my wish even more unrealistic is that I want it to be digital and not cost more then twice of FF. I dont expect to go medium format this decade. FF works excellent with fast lenses.

12-26-2017, 07:01 PM - 1 Like   #8
Pentaxian
disconnekt's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: SoCal/I.E.
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,698
"Is it worth it, let me work it, I put my thing down, flip it and reverse it" #sorry, couldn't help quoting Missy Elliott based off the thread title 😁😁
12-26-2017, 08:07 PM - 2 Likes   #9
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,254
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
Depth of field: Medium format lenses in general have smaller apertures then their FF counterparts. If you like the DoF on medium format, just stop down your FF lens to match the DoF.
I think you have fundamentally misunderstood something here. The crop factor from 135 to 645 film is about 0.57, so my FA645 150mm @ f/2.8 will have a similarly shallow depth of field as my FA* 85mm @ f/1.4, which has about the same field of view.

The crop factor is less dramatic with the 645Z, but just for fun here's a shot I just took @ f/4.0

12-26-2017, 08:13 PM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,526
QuoteOriginally posted by reivax Quote
I know this is an incredibly subjective question, but I've been wanting medium format for a while now. There's no way I could afford a 645D, let alone a 645Z, but those older film cameras are really tempting.

The problem is, I know nothing about film cameras. I own a couple of FF film cameras, but don't use them (not even sure they work, I got them when I ordered some vintage lenses). Medium Format film cameras look like a lot to take in, but I'd be willing to learn if it is "worth it". I'd probably be looking into a 645n or nii if I went medium format (because digital is out of my price range).
Is MF worth it? To me, YES. But like you, I can't afford a digital 645 and love the larger 645 film size over the 645 sensor size, so I shoot digital APS-C and FF, and 645 film. I use a film scanner, but an Epson flatbed is an affordable alternative.

Where are you in California? I'll be in San Diego in March and would be happy to meet up and get you started if you don't want to teach yourself via YouTube University.
12-26-2017, 08:45 PM - 1 Like   #11
Veteran Member
reivax's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: California
Posts: 826
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
Is MF worth it? To me, YES. But like you, I can't afford a digital 645 and love the larger 645 film size over the 645 sensor size, so I shoot digital APS-C and FF, and 645 film. I use a film scanner, but an Epson flatbed is an affordable alternative.

Where are you in California? I'll be in San Diego in March and would be happy to meet up and get you started if you don't want to teach yourself via YouTube University.
I am in California. Not San Diego, but not too far. It would be awesome to meet up with you. Keep me posted and I will definitely make the drive.
12-26-2017, 11:03 PM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,168
My personal 2 cents worth. 645 digital (D or Z) is not a major bump over Full Frame in terms of crop factor. It is a bump however. 645 or 6x7 film is a much bigger jump.

1) if you have little to no film experience I don't recommend film. It isn't insurmountable but the tradeoff is pretty large.
2) if you haven't tried FF yet, try it before making a leap into MF since the cost factors are high even with vintage equipment - the Medium Format lenses are not cheap.
3) if you really have the itch - try to wait for the "right deal".
12-27-2017, 12:46 AM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 159
There is a certain something special with MF, but I think the key advantages of MF would be lost when comparing MF film versus a good FF digital with large-aperture lenses, unless you had a very high quality end-to-end workflow that was also efficient to make the most of the film. From experience I know that scanning is a real PITA, and you pretty soon encounter the limitations of the source medium in terms of grain and sensitivity, and the dynamic range is also pretty restrictive if you're shooting slide film. And outsourcing the scanning to get highest quality scans is both time-consuming and expensive.

I would recommend a good 35mm full frame with some well-chosen lenses if you're not in a position to jump into MF digital. I think you'll produce better images more easily, and with a great deal less frustration. I still suffer nightmares from my days of slide scanning.
12-27-2017, 02:16 AM   #14
Pentaxian
LaHo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Greater Copenhagen Area
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 428
Firing off a few rolls of film in your vintage 35mm film cameras might be a good idea just to find out if the film experience is anything for you. The workflow is quite different compared to digital.

But I have done what you propose. I used to shoot 35mm film in the 90'ies and earlier, but went digital in 2005 and "forgot" all about film for a couple of years. Then I acquired some used medium film gear - Pentax 6x7 and Pentax 645 - and love it. It's true what murrelet says above: I believe I could sell my used gear for more than I have paid for it. That's not the case with my digital gear.

Shooting medium format film can be a very rewarding experience if you can adapt to the different workflow. It is slower, as you have to process the film to get feedback, and you will also make fewer exposures, as film can be expensive. But I love the look I get with film - both colour and black&white. I also like the tangible results - the negatives (or slides) and eventually the prints. If you buy used Pentax 645 film gear, you have already started on a Pentax 645 digital system - just buy the appropriate digital body. The lenses are the same, and most of the old lenses work equally well on digital.
12-27-2017, 08:20 AM   #15
Pentaxian
timw4mail's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Driving a Mirage
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,670
If you really just want to give medium format a try, I'd recommend starting with a less expensive TLR, rather than jumping into the (generally much more) expensive world of medium format SLRs.

Also, it is fairly common for medium format cameras to lack light meters, so a smart phone app, or dedicated light meter is a good thing to have.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, 645z, camera, cameras, film, format, medium, medium format
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Post your non-pentax medium-format and large-format pictures DenisG Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 26 12-07-2020 08:02 PM
Pentax Medium Format Lenses on the K-1 ivanvernon Lens Clubs 104 12-07-2018 01:40 PM
Professional Video moving from crop to "medium format" beholder3 Photographic Industry and Professionals 3 02-27-2016 05:46 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:10 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top