[abruzzi]

So, a little extra than expected from my tax return has opened up the possibility of experimenting with larger than 35mm, but I don’t have a ton of money. So I decided I can peel away USD$1000 to pick something up, and love some suggestions inside or outside the Pentax pantheon. The limitation though is that the $1k needs to be a fully functioning system including a decent wide lens. Also this will not be a studio camera, and will mostly be used for landscape photography. So far this is what I’m seeing:

Pentax 645Nii: I can get a decent condition one with a lens within budget. A very modern system—autofocus, auto exposure, multiple backs for quick loading. But is 6x4.5 a big enough step over 35mm? Will I be happy with it or will it just make me want to jump up to a 6x7 or 6x9 system right away?

Pentax 67: the 67ii is well out of my price range, so I’d be looking at a later model 67 with a TTL finder. Nice big negative, but a lot of the niceties with preloaded backs, auto exposure, etc. is missing.

Mamiya RZ67 or RB67: either could be had in my price, but I don’t know how well they work as portable cameras.

Fuji GSW690iii: the big negative is fixed lens, so either I get a GW with a standard lens or a GSW with a wide lens. Very portable, but 100% manual, not even a meter. How much would I like a rangefinder? I don’t know.

Some other that I looked at but couldn’t find in my price range would be Hasselblad 500C or Contax. I’d also prefer not to go square 6x6, which would limit a lot of others.

Any other things I should look at, or reccomendations?

[stevebrot]

Holga?

Consider:

• The 645 negative is a little less than three times the area of 35mm, but with a crop factor of 0.6x. Area is probably the more important of the two because it translates directly into data per exposure. Translation: Yes, it is significantly larger than 35mm.
• 645N (no ii) with mostly manual focus lenses is probably your most cost-effective medium format kit in Pentax-land
• A 6x7 or 67 kit will not cost much more than a 645N, but the negative is HUGE by comparison
• Huge negatives translate to less exposures per roll
• Huge negatives translate to huge scanned image files, even at modest scan resolutions
• The film carriers for the 645N are nice to have in the field...pity they don't allow mid-roll swap
• Don't even think "long" lenses and MF in the same sentence
• Mamiya and Bronica SLR can be had for very good prices, but ergonomics may be a problem depending on model
• Fuji MF rangefinders are a sweet option...There are a few users on this site who have them and who never speak ill of them
• Don't sweat the meter/no meter thing*
• Mamiya MF rangefinders should also be an option as should other brands (see: Medium format buyers guide Pt.3 - Rangefinders - Japan Camera Hunter)

Steve

(...has successfully resisted the MF film photography bug for several years now...except for 6x7 120 film holders for the 4x5 view camera...)

* Working with a meterless camera is less of a headache than one might think. It does not take long to realize that most TTL meters are fairly brain-dead and that serious field (non-studio) work benefits from a more deliberate and studied approach to exposure. On the flip side, studio work and real-time TTL don't belong in the same sentence together (IMHO). Problem solved for the two most common use cases.

[Robot camera]

I was going to suggest the Bronica SQA and SQB system before I saw you weren't interested in going square; reasonably priced, freely available, and there are 645 backs to be had, but that means using (and carrying) a pentaprism finder. With a square format you can use a waist level finder.

By the way, the Mamiya RZ67 weighs five and a half pounds with back, lens and WLF. The RB67 is nearly six pounds. They are studio cameras.

[6BQ5]

Don't forget Bronica. I have an ETRS system and it's a nice camera. You're welcome to it ... except that I only have one 75mm lens for it. PM me if you are interested.

And yes, 120 film in any shape is a big jump from 135 film.

[jspillane]

The Pentax 67 is an excellent camera, and of the listed options is the route that I would go. I think it handles better with a prism finder - WLF's really only make sense of 6x6 cameras in my opinion, as on any format other than square they keep you essentially locked to landscape orientation.

Personally, I prefer 6x6 (Hasselblad and Rolleiflex). There is a LOT of good gear for cheap, be patient and don't over spend. You could have a very complete 645 of 67 kit for under $1k with a little effort.

Best,

[Silent Street]

Start with the Pentax 67 and build up a complete system; the camera in very good condition should be around $455 to $600 (try to resist the temptation of buying from Japanese dealers because of known price-gouging that pushes the prices up to extraordinarily inflated amounts). The prism finder can be changed to a chimney finder, waist-level finder or even no finder at all, additional to accessories that can be attached to it to make focusing easier with slower lenses.

Pay attention to the quality of lenses in whatever system you are looking at; this is where your money should go, not to anything fancy by way of a camera.

Be aware that the TTL finder of the Pentax 67 meters to 1 second only. You will need a competent grasp of hand-held metering (incident/multispot either or both of these) to meter beyond 1 second and take into account reciprocity characteristics of the film in use.

Yes, there is a sizeable jump from 35mm upward. A 6x7 negative or transparency is 400% bigger than 35mm and spreads tone and contrast over a larger area. Having said that, I also use 35mm, 4x5 and pinhole cameras with lots of challenging film. It's not the format that matters, but how you interpret a scene and bring it through to the camera. One of the advantages of 6x7 though is being able to crop out 6x6 perfectly -- the best of both worlds without a loss of quality.

I rarely see anybody using 645 today. The question of whether it is a "dead format" or not is an enduring one.

I am not a fan of the big, cumbersome and clunky studio-borne MF cameras such as Bronicas and Mamiyas, even though many people have adapted to using these in the landscape/street context.

Don't forget to add a tripod!

[abruzzi]

Thanks for all the information. I hadn’t known about Bronica so I’ll look into them. The worry about 645 size isn’t compared to 35, but whether I’ll end up considering it just a stepping stone to the larger formats. Where I am there are few options other than eBay for finding these cameras, and the bulk of the sellers of these cameras on eBay are Japanese resellers. I get that they are a little overpriced (or occasionally very overpriced), but they also seem to be the only sellers that provide thorough info about the item including possible lens issues like fungus or haze. One item I’m looking at is 67 with TTL finder and a 55mm lens for about $750 shipped. It’s in good shape, but whether it will still be there when the IRS comes though, I don’t know.

[pcrichmond]

Wondering why you wouldn't be interested in 6x6?
I have the Mamiya RB67, Pentax 6x7 and Mamiya C330. The RB is a great camera with the option of pre loaded backs but is very cumbersome in the field. The Pentax is still very heavy for field use but handles much like any Pentax slr, I've done some great hikes with it and never regretted the extra weight. It's big and heavy enough though that extra care is needed to keep it from getting banged around. Lenses for both are still readily available in the US market. My favorite for field work though is the C330. It is square but very lightweight and easy to use. Carrying the camera with a wide angle, normal and telephoto setup really isn't much more than carrying the K-1 with an equivalent prime lens setup. Loaned out a Yashicamat a few years back (never to return) and miss it dearly. Was square but easy enough to carry in a large coat pocket if needed.
If you're really set on the longer negative and want something that handles much like your current 35 for landscapes, I'd look for the 645 or 6x7.
Have fun, MF is a treat and can give you some astounding negatives.

[Silent Street]

Thanks for all the information. I hadn’t known about Bronica so I’ll look into them. The worry about 645 size isn’t compared to 35, but whether I’ll end up considering it just a stepping stone to the larger formats. Where I am there are few options other than eBay for finding these cameras, and the bulk of the sellers of these cameras on eBay are Japanese resellers. I get that they are a little overpriced (or occasionally very overpriced), but they also seem to be the only sellers that provide thorough info about the item including possible lens issues like fungus or haze. One item I’m looking at is 67 with TTL finder and a 55mm lens for about $750 shipped. It’s in good shape, but whether it will still be there when the IRS comes though, I don’t know.

I get that they are a little overpriced (or occasionally very overpriced), but they also seem to be the only sellers that provide thorough info about the item including possible lens issues like fungus or haze.

The Japanese at street store level are far, far more helpful than online sellers. I'm not saying they are fun to deal with (they're rather very strict about what you touch and how you touch it!). Unfortunately, the information they provide online in eBay is quite often not thorough, but often copied and pasted from another listing. Nor is condition correctly described. A more dicey example of Russian Roulette could not be imagined.

I threw back to Japan a Pentax 6x7 chimney finder recently which was described as having 'No Fungus, Some small dusts' [sic] yet the following things were not advised to me: the dioptric correction was scratchy and abnormal; the rubber eyecup had been roughly trimmed with a knife or a saw (!) (replacements are not available), and evidence of fungus was found in the eyepiece. That "some small dusts" turned out to be a Saharan sandstorm. Amidst a plethora of strange apologies, then the painful exchange of poor English and irrelevant cross references "to not yet new products come now or then" were yet another salient reminder to buy locally (which I did!). Can you search for your goods locally at street level, or somewhere that you can travel to for personal inspection before you commit to buying? I eventually turned to Photrio and bought a chimney finder from a trusted tri-lingual member there (based in Japan) and I could not be happier.

[twilhelm]

I wouldn’t completely rule out a Pentax 645. My local shop has an Nii that’s been CLA’d with holders and a 45-85 lens for $750. I’ve been having a tough time not walking away with it.

[abruzzi]

I’d love to buy locally, but the only local camera dealer just has a few token 35mm cameras that he keeps around for art students, and the rest is 10 year old digital point and shoots. Craigslist around here is a bit of a wasteland, though there is a Hasselblad 500C listed. He doesn’t have a price on it, and looking at prices eBay (and the fact that he is also selling a Leica M4) I’m guessing it will be out of my budget.

I’ve bought a half dozen (admittedly cheaper) lenses from Japanese sellers and have been relatively happy. One thing I can say about the Japanese sellers I’ve dealt with is they at least provide good photos. Maybe some scam that by using fake photos but just about anything camera related on eBay that I have bought from American sellers have had horrible blurry photos that made no mention of the condition of the optics or anything else. I usually didn’t care because I was buying cheap ($10 lenses) but at least the Japanese sellers were trying.

If there are good US sources for medium format cameras like the Pentax 67, I’d love to know. KEH and UsedPhotoPro (Roberts) don’t have any 67 bodies. Neither do B&H or Adorama (though Adorama has a $23,400 lens for the 67–a bit out of my budget.). I haven’t seem much here or PhoTrio either. There is a local guy that wants to sell me his Sinar F1 4x5 camera, but for now, that’s a step too far.

[leekil]

Fuji GA645i is significantly cheaper and lighter than the others you mentioned, if you want to try medium format out. Drawback (?) would be a built-in fixed focal-length lens.

[asahijock]

The key to whether you need bigger than 645 negs is the question: What is likely to be the biggest print you might want?. Tell us that and we can say if 645 will meet that requirement.

asahijock

[tuco]

...
Fuji GSW690iii: the big negative is fixed lens, so either I get a GW with a standard lens or a GSW with a wide lens. Very portable, but 100% manual, not even a meter. How much would I like a rangefinder? I don’t know.

Medium format film cameras all have pros and cons. That's why there are so many types of them. I shoot a bunch of them as you can see in my signature. Each has some desirable attribute. I can't say you'll like a rangefinder. It all depends on you.

None of the MF cameras in my signature have a light meter on them and I get by just fine. I use my GSW690III a lot. Mostly because I want the 6x9 frame and I like the camera. But rangefinders can be a love it or hate it kind of camera. It's a hard decision when you're looking for one camera to do it all in this format.

[mattb123]

I originally took the MF plunge with an original Pentax 645 with a A 75/2.8. I added a A 45/2.8 and A 200/4 shortly after for a pretty good starter kit that was at least a couple hundred dollars under $1k.

A year later I got a 645D and added more lenses for a more versatile kit. No regrets and I still shoot the film 645 every now and then too.