|
hello, and welcome to the long overdue medium and large format megathread part 2! The original thread was almost as out of date as the cameras being used in it, and an insurmountable amount of information was in it, so I figured it's about time we start anew and get some of the links in the OP working again. But first:  This is a picture of your spine. I urge you to reconsider before going on. Your spine is probably going to hate you in a few months, but maybe you'll get some good pictures out of it. With that being said, allow me to introduce the titular formats, and what separates them from every day, run-of-the-mill 35mm:  Or, in more plain terms:  35mm on left, 120 in the middle (shot 6x6, it would appear), and 4x5 on right So what does bigness actually do for a film plane? Nearly all dSLRs and even some compacts today are what's known as "full frame", or, in other words the same size as 35mm film. While this mostly pertains to sharpness and resolution, it also has an effect on the depth of field. For example, 5.6 at 35mm may be enough for you to get a person's entire face in focus up close, but f/5.6 on 120 and 4x5 would be shallower and shallower because the lenses themselves are bigger. So, while an f-stop on a 35mm 1.8 may be wide enough for you to focus, it would be approaching nothingness on a medium format camera, and would be unusable on a 4x5 lens. Here's a handy-dandy DoF calculator for precisely such problems, however: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html And generally, it's not THAT big of a difference, but if all you've shot is 35mm, it's certainly something to consider. TL;DR version: in plain terms, more area is devoted to recording the same image. the most immediate gain in shooting 120 and 4x5 is higher resolution, thus meaning sharper images and bigger prints. it also means huge, massive, unwieldy cameras and very shallow, distinctive DOF. this only gets more extreme if you shoot larger formats. And, for more bad news, depending on your camera, you should only expect to get about 10-14 shots per 120 roll. Unless you're shooting the harder to find 220, which is twice as many (also, more cameras take 120) On my 6x7, I get 10 shots, on a 6x6, which is more typical of medium format, you would get 12, and so on and so forth. And for 4x5 (and 8x10, if you REALLY want to crush your feeble spine), I hope you have a shitload of these things laying around:  Two shots per holder, one on each side. And you'll definitely gently caress it up the first time you go out. I would bet on it. So, what's all this trouble for, actually, anyways? 4x5:  Cherisse by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr  Ben Fong by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr  Malene by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr  the view by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr Another thing worth mentioning about 4x5 is that the f-stops can go ABOVE the paltry f/22 you may be used to. On up to 32, 48, 64, and even an absurd f/90. This allows for extremely long exposures, much longer and more detailed than cameras of other formats could do. And needless to say, the detail would be extraordinary. The long exposure here is over a minute long, if I recall, shot at f/64. As far as medium format goes:  ---_1246 by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr  ---_0011 by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr  blue lips by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr  ---_0284 by dorkasaurus_rex, on Flickr While I shoot 6x7, 6x6 is what's considered "standard" for a medium format, in my estimation. Now, while you might think that because these cameras are bigger, they must necessarily be more expensive, right? Well, not necessarily. If you absolutely MUST shoot 120, there are some stupidly cheap options, such as the Holga and the Diana. While these are absurdly cheap, and usually made entirely out of plastic, it doesn't mean they can't take a good picture. See here and all the assorted hipster accoutrements you could ever want on a camera! But, if you're as broke as a joke and still are dying for a 120 camera made with a bit metal, a Yashica TLR is probably your best bet:  They shoot 6x6, are compact, neat, and easy to load, and generally can be counted on to have two extremely sharp lenses, usually non-interchangeable. While the price range is quite broad, you can expect to take one home for about $120 bucks, possibly even less, but be sure to do your homework on all the different kinds out there There are many other cheap-ish cameras out there that will be spectacularly sharp and take some excellent pictures in the MF arena. Some other names to scout for deals would be Rolleiflex, Mamiya C330 or C220 There's also the Lomography-branded Belair, which is a 6x12 (!!!) MF camera with folding bellows which comes in at a decidedly overpriced $250-$300 range, given that it's partially plastic AFAIK. For my MF dollar though, nothing will top the Pentax 6x7:  DAT GRIP This is what I shoot MF on, pretty much exclusively, and the best thing about it is that there are deals to be had on it, you can pick one up for $300 or less if you're savvy, probably in the upper $400s otherwise. And, if you're afraid of looking into a ground glass on 6x6 cameras and the like, this one basically shoots exactly like a gigantic 35mm! "What about cheap 4x5's?" you might ponder. To that question I think I would chortle pretty hardily because "cheap" and "4x5" don't belong in the same sentence. Nobody buys a 4x5 camera because 35mm is breaking the bank. The holders are expensive. The film is expensive. The loupes are expensive. The cases are expensive. The glass is expensive. The bodies are expensive. The cheapest way in would probably be a Crown Graphic (yes, the old press cameras):  You can snatch one up for $100-$300, and, while it may actually be lighter than the Pentax 6x7, it's certainly not a camera you should imagine as convenient. I would strongly, strongly recommend for anyone shooting 4x5 to do it with a tripod. It's entirely possible to hand-hold a Crown Graphic and other cameras, and yes, people used to do it all the time, but trust me, you don't wanna go out shooting expensive rear end 4x5-film all day only to find out that you had the horizon slightly skewed in every picture All my 4x5 was shot on a Sinar F:  which can also be had (body only) for about $300-$400. The one I shoot with belongs to my school, who also provided me with the holder, lens, tripod, case, loupe, and shutter release for it. That being said, all the pain and anguish of shooting 4x5 and above will DEFINITELY make you a better photographer. If you want to be more consistent, and take less pictures overall but produce more keepers, try shooting a bit of film, and definitely look to medium and large formats. Nothing makes you learn quicker then, after a long day of shooting 4x5 out and about, after carefully loading many holders in the darkroom or changing bag of your choice, loving up every single picture because of some stupid bullshit. Seriously, just go out and shoot with some big rear end cameras. This could be you:  SCANNING Scanning, especially large format, is a whole huge pain in the butt because there is a tonal range that exists in film that is extremely difficult to reproduce/balance digitally. In general, it's good to scan in both AdobeRGB and sRGB formats, Adobe for printing/your personal usage and sRGB for web: https://fstoppers.com/pictures/adobergb-vs-srgb-3167 Although a fuller write-up on scanning is probably necessary because seriously, it can be annoying. dorkasaurus_rex fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Feb 19, 2015 |
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 04:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
Reserved.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 04:46
|
|
|
You should throw something in there about the Chamonix, aka the cool camera for cool people. http://www.chamonixviewcamera.com/45.html I am not a cool person, but I do have a pentax 67. Pentax 67's rule.  Open Cut by MrDespair, on Flickr  img004-2.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 04:50
|
|
|
Dorkasaurus, I already PMed you, but again, thanks for the new thread and updated OP. I almost consigned myself to skimming through the whole previous one. It was hard on my internet as I still live in the stone age (150kB/s DSL)
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
Thanks for making the new thread. I just bought a box of 8x10 xray film. At 30 cents per sheet it was pretty much an impulse buy. I'll update after i shoot some
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
 Hasselblad: The choice of discerning
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 09:54
|
|
|
MF and LF: we spend too much time loading film holders and scanning 2gb TIFF images, we can't be bothered with capitalization! Just kidding, this thread is great and you're great DR.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 14:41
|
|
|
dorkasaurus_rex posted:"What about cheap 4x5's?" you might ponder. To that question I think I would chortle pretty hardily because "cheap" and "4x5" don't belong in the same sentence. Nobody buys a 4x5 camera because 35mm is breaking the bank. The holders are expensive. The film is expensive. The loupes are expensive. The cases are expensive. The glass is expensive. The bodies are expensive. The cheapest way in would probably be a Crown Graphic (yes, the old press cameras): For the record, this is a "top-RF" Graphic camera. This type uses interchangeable rangefinder cams, one for each focal length. They are pretty hard to find except for the cam for the original 135mm lens. Thus, you're probably better off hunting down a side-RF model (branded Kalart or Hugo Meyer rangefinder). One other complexity of large format is the back. The standard Graphic back was initially intended only to hold film holders - you focus on the panel, slide in the holder, and shoot. However, accessories like Polaroid backs and rollfilm (120) holders eventually came out and these typically cannot fit behind the ground glass. These need a removable panel, which is called the Graflok (or International-) type back. These can be distinguished by the sliding latches at top and bottom. This is a real nice feature but not strictly necessary. Graphic back (for Speed Graphic or Crown Graphic cameras):  Graflok/International back:  Confusingly, Graflex made a third type for their single-lens-reflex 4x5 models, which is referred to as a Graflex back: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
Just borrowed a Sinar from school. It's not the camera that kills your back, it's the freaking heavy tripods.  Saw this image at a museum a while back:  (By Karin Borghouts) I was wondering what camera movements she did for this. Note the stretched out people on the ground. I'm pretty sure she didn't just shift up or down, unless she used a ridiculously wide lens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
Two types of large format cameras have been shown in this thread - monorails, like the Sinar F1 dorkasaurus_rex uses, and technical/press cameras like the Crown Graphic or Linhof Technika. There's a third major category, though: field cameras. My Chamonix 045N-2 is an example; there's at least three other people in the Dorkroom who own one. Other examples include the Toyo 45A, Zone VI, Shen Hao, Ikeda Anba, and the Canham DLC. My Chamonix:  Somebody else's Chamonix, folded:  The advantages of field cameras include light weight (not including lens, the 4x5 Chamonix is 3 pounds), compact size when folded, and ability to use wide-angle lenses more easily than a press or technical camera. Disadvantages are smaller amounts of movement than monorails and lesser precision in movements than technical cameras.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 16:28
|
|
|
Fragrag posted:Saw this image at a museum a while back: Considering the vantage point, there might not be any movements at all - just looks like a very wide lens. If this picture were taken from a lower point, it'd definitely require a lot of rise to get everything in the frame.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
Advice Needed Ok so I found a Calumet 45NXII 4x5 with a Caltar II-E 150mm F6.3 lens on cragslist. The guy wants $300 for it but I asked him if he is willing to trade a Canon 40D for it. He seems interested. First off, is this a fair trade assuming everything works? Another thing is how wide is 150mm on large format? What is the 35mm equivalent?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
150mm is equivalent to a 50mm on 35mm.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 17:53
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:Advice Needed For the record that's a budget triplet-type lens. It's not real fast and probably won't deliver huge movements or good wide-open sharpness. It's also not worth a lot I would imagine, since you can pick up a good Symmar or something for peanuts. I think a 40D would be a fair-ish swap, body alone. The body will probably get you $225ish, the lens is probably worth $50-75.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:Advice Needed Do it. It's a rebadged Cambo 45NXII. Also see if the guy will give you any of the accessories you'll need, like film holders. (Don't pay more than $10 each.) The lens won't give you the greatest freedom to use movements, but you can worry about upgrading later when you get more comfortable with the LF workflow. 150mm on 4x5 is like 40mm or so on 35mm, in my experience. e: the 4x5 diagonal is almost exactly 3.75x the 35mm diagonal. 150mm/3.75=40mm. MrBlandAverage fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Feb 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
Just sold my Graflex monorail for what I originally paid for it, now time to save a little to get that Chamonix 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 21:37
|
|
|
Because I'm getting in on the first page, I just want to plug my own favorite camera: Fuji GW690.     it's like $500 (for GW690II) with a single fixed lens. It's stupid simple to use, a rangefinder, and amazing glass with 6x9cm negs. The last photo was shot at f/8 for some perspective.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
Maybe you should have some bits about the other MF systems? RB/RZ67, Bronica GS-1, Mamiya/Pentax/Contax 645, etc. Maybe we should all collaborate!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:Maybe you should have some bits about the other MF systems? RB/RZ67, Bronica GS-1, Mamiya/Pentax/Contax 645, etc. Maybe we should all collaborate! Having owned a Hassleblad 500cm, a Mamiya RB67, a Pentax 6x7, a Mamiya 645, a Bronica SQ-Ai, and a Bronica ETRS, I feel like I should write that post. I probably will when I'm home after dinner. I'll be drunk probably. (Oh god I have a camera buying problem)
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
Yeah, that's what I posted what I did. Also, no one really seems to like 645 here, which I think is still a nifty format for being cheap and still getting enough of the MF feel (DOF & tones). I use a Pentax 645N, which has glass compatible with the older generation (645) and now the Pentax 645D, digital (a rather cheap ~$9k). It even comes with analog exif data! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 22:00
|
|
|
Not seeing a lot of 6x6 love so far in this thread. Here's a few from a roll I just developed: Mamiya_Delta003(2) by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Mamiya_Delta006 by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Mamiya_Delta008 by Tim Breeze, on Flickr  Mamiya_Delta010 by Tim Breeze, on Flickr Mamiya C330: Built like a tank, weighs about as much.  Mamiya_Delta002 by Tim Breeze, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:Yeah, that's what I posted what I did. Also, no one really seems to like 645 here, which I think is still a nifty format for being cheap and still getting enough of the MF feel (DOF & tones). I use a Pentax 645N, which has glass compatible with the older generation (645) and now the Pentax 645D, digital (a rather cheap ~$9k). 645 is kind of the redheaded stepchild of medium format, that's why. Not that it's not viable to shoot with, but it's a smaller negative than 6x6 or 6x7, but you get a lot less shot per roll than 35mm. It is nice that you can get autofocus lenses and stuff, as 6x6 autofocus is pretty expensive and I don't know of anything bigger. Still though, if I was just getting started I'd hop straight to 6x6/6x7/6x9 as those are a lot more negative for not a whole lot more. I do have a GS645, which is a small 6x4.5 folder. It's a great shooter and it folds flat enough to go anywhere. It's got a modern meter and coatings, but they tend to be a little fragile. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Feb 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
I was pretty tempted by a Fuji GA645zi on craigslist with a busted rear LCD but mostly so I could call it "a small format point and shoot".
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
I've got a GS-1, the optics are great, the body is sturdy (and pretty light for its size, easily handheld), the AE rotary prism makes metering easy and allows for portrait or landscape orientation. And they're pretty cheap, hunting around has got me pretty much all the lenses I need, the body, rotary prism, speedgrip and a few backs for under $500. Only criticisms would be that the default viewfinder can be a little dark and too many people seem to think I "settled" for it instead of a Hasselblad!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
guidoanselmi posted:Because I'm getting in on the first page, I just want to plug my own favorite camera: Fuji GW690. Another big thumbs up for the GW690ii here too. One think I learnt when you're shooting in T mode, the shutter only closes when you wind on and only after the film has moved past the open shutter a little as well, which results in stuff like this: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:06
|
|
|
I want to get this in on the first page of the new thread as well: If you're thinking about making the jump to medium format, the initial investment can be unsettling to say the least. Especially when you do a little too much reading on messageboards, where people are liable to say that anything less than a 501c and a Nikon 9000 might as well be trash. Luckily, that is complete balderdash; it is perfectly possible to enjoy the benefits of a big fat 6x6 negative for less than the cost of a new car. I started out in MF with a Holga (Not for long), and it hooked me on film in general, though I didn't use the holga for long before switching to 35mm. The first 'real' medium format camera I bought, however, was a $25 Yashica-D. I used and loved that dinky little f/3.5 TLR for almost 4 years before I dropped and broke it, and I think that even after going through a Kiev-60, a Pentax 6x7, and now my 500c, many of my favorite MF images were made with the $25 tlr.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
No matter how far I go, I always end up coming back to my Rolleiflex. It's a joy to work with and it's just a killer camera.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 00:53
|
|
|
After messing around with an Holga and a homemade 6x15 pinhole camera, I'm thinking about getting into proper Medium Format. Money is a problem and I'd like to keep as cheap as possible. The thing is, I'll be in Moscow and Kiev for some days in two weeks and have been thinking about getting some soviet MF gear. Do you guys have opinions on them, like the Kiev 60 or the Kiev 88? They seen to be considerably cheaper than other cameras and I'll probably be able to find some for nice prices while i'm there, but are they worth it? Otherwise i've been thinking about maybe going the Yashica TLR route...
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Do you guys have opinions on them, like the Kiev 60 or the Kiev 88? They seen to be considerably cheaper than other cameras and I'll probably be able to find some for nice prices while i'm there, but are they worth it? No offense but both are a bit on the trashy side. They tend to be a bit unreliable, there's a couple companies who specialize in fixing them up and doing some basic improvements to them and if I was going to get one it'd be those. Your mileage may vary on one you pick up out of a random shop. In general, the 60 is probably more reliable than the 88, and has a good lens selection. I would keep an eye out for cheap Moskvas though! They are great little folders made on Zeiss tooling captured in World War II. Iskras were another model, they are a little more finicky but if I remember some have slightly better lenses. If you want to go the Yashica TLR route, I do have a cleaned Tessar/Yashinon Yashica-Mat for sale. Rolleiflexes are also awesome if you end up liking the TLR form factor. Bronica ETRS/SQ are also pretty great for the money.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
Thanks, I'll do some research on the moskva. The thing for me is, I'm in Brazil and anything film related is ridiculously expensive around here (I'm talking 20USD for a roll of 35mm tri-x), so i'm thinking about using the trip to buy a MF camera (and TONS of film). Buying from the US can be done for small things - thank you freestyle - , but on bigger/more expensive things import taxes are completely abusive. I saw your mat on the gear thread, but when I add shipping and taxes the price would go so high that I could probably get a fuji 690 in Europe while i'm there for the same money. Basically i'm looking for a 200-300 USD solution that I can get in Europe (I'll be in western europe also)... I think i'd enjoy TLR, but i'm quite open to whatever kind of system that can be done on my budget. God the moskva-5 looks so sexy...
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:19
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:After messing around with an Holga and a homemade 6x15 pinhole camera, I'm thinking about getting into proper Medium Format. Money is a problem and I'd like to keep as cheap as possible. The thing is, I'll be in Moscow and Kiev for some days in two weeks and have been thinking about getting some soviet MF gear. If it's cheaper than 100 or something then go for it, but you would honestly be better off saving for a pentax 6x7. You can find a complete kit for like 400 bucks
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:27
|
|
|
Be careful if you buy a Moskva. Since you'll be travelling, you won't have any way of confirming that the rangefinder is calibrated correctly until you develop your photos. It's not so chancy with an SLR because you're focusing on ground glass.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 03:51
|
|
|
My reason for getting into MF was sentimental. Ensign Pocket 3 by Execudork, on Flickr This was my grandfather's camera. From its age and condition when I dug it out of a box nearly 10 years after his death, I think it was used during the late 1950's and early 1960's. I have no memory of him using it, when I knew him he had a series of ordinary point-and-shoot 35mm cameras, and I don't think he was particularly avid about photography. In any case, it uses regular 120 roll film, which back in the day also went by the name "2 1/4 B", the film equivalent of British Imperial units of measure (does anybody else in the world still talk about a person's weight in "stones"?) and takes 6x9 images. It's objectively a terrible camera - the simple lens is anything but sharp, the apertures are "S", "M", and "L", which by direct measurement with a ruler I've worked out to be f/16, f/20, and f/22, focus can be set between "portraits" and "views" by moving the lens forward or back between the two notches, and the shutter speeds of "I", "B", and "T" make for easy long-exposures, but at 1/25th (approx) as the fastest ("I" for "Instant!") it's basically impossible to hand-hold. But, if the most important feature of a camera is that it is the one you are currently carrying, the second most important feature must be the reason you picked it up on your way out of the house. For me and this camera, that reason is pure sentiment, it even smells like their basement, and reminds me of being 14 years old and poking around the back workbench. *** I'd like to get a *good* camera for MF or LF. There are so many options, and each has its appeal. Being able to do movements, and tilt/shift any lens is a big draw for a monorail or one of those beautiful Chamonix. Or the cheap fun of a TLR with waist-level viewfinder. Or a big honkin' 645, 6x6, or 6x7 camera - if I get asked to shoot a party because of my camera, having a wooden grip on it adds some legitimacy, I think. From what other people have been saying, it looks like one could get pretty comfortably into MF (body, a lens or two, some accessories and maybe some developing stuff) for $300-500, which doesn't seem too bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Thanks, I'll do some research on the moskva. if I were still in LA (where i'd just swing by samy's), i'd volunteer to get cash from you w/ paypal and then go buy stuff and ship to ya. i'm sure someone in the forums who can help out if you're not making a trip for any other reason.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 05:55
|
|
|
Well, first of all thanks  .This is actually a tourism trip, going to spend 20 some days travelling around and I just thought that since i'll already be there why not use it to buy a Mf camera, since i've wanted one for some time, you know? I've been trawling ebay.co.uk and found some decent yashicas there, some bronicas too, but the pentax are usually a lit bit out of my price range, but if i could find a good deal they'd be a possibility. Germany eBay also has some yashicas for good prices, and it looks like they're probably going to be my final choice, but I wanted to ask the thread so i'd be sure of exploring all the possibilities. Germany also has many mamiyas RB67 that seen to go out for a good price. The Soviet gear can be found for some better prices, but then if the built quality is sub-par it's not really worth it. Primo Itch fucked around with this message at 06:26 on Feb 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 06:13
|
|
|
Soviet gear is so hit and miss quality wise it's really hard to recommend it to someone as their only camera. I can recommend Yashicas as a solid middle of the road camera for not much money, my first 120 camera was a Yashica 635.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 06:36
|
|
|
Primo Itch posted:The thing for me is, I'm in Brazil and anything film related is ridiculously expensive around here (I'm talking 20USD for a roll of 35mm tri-x), so i'm thinking about using the trip to buy a MF camera (and TONS of film). I can't help with the camera, but I'm in Aus and I buy my film from maco. Just remember to subtract ~20% since you aren't paying tax.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 07:12
|
|
|
8th-samurai posted:Soviet gear is so hit and miss quality wise it's really hard to recommend it to someone as their only camera. I can recommend Yashicas as a solid middle of the road camera for not much money, my first 120 camera was a Yashica 635. My Yashica-A was kind of a piece of poo poo, but it cost me $70 and it allowed me to inform myself that medium format was something worth investing in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 07:35
|
|
|
Slightly off-topic (still about film, but 35mm) - Primo Itch, nobody in South America has said they want to participate in my Camera Around the World goon-project. If you're interested, the thread is here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3499036 There's no chance the camera will go in that direction until well after you return from your European adventure (and I'm calling it now: you MUST post pictures from your trip in the Dorkroom, somewhere - that's the price of advice around these parts  ) and you can always change your mind. But pictures from Brazil would be rockin' 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 10:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
Primo Itch posted:Well, first of all thanks If you're going to be in Germany or can order from German eBay you should look into the Pentacon Six, which the Kiev 60 is essentially a less well made rip off of. It's a pretty sweet camera with a great range of lenses including a bunch made by Zeiss' East German division, Zeiss Jena. Germany is still pretty big on film photography and there are plenty of these things kicking about in good condition and often at good prices. You could also look at the Exact 66, a similar design with some more modern features like TTL metering. I think you can get an adapter so it'll fit P6 lenses and vice versa. Way more information than you could ever want on Pentacons, Exaktas and Kievs from this awesome website: http://www.pentaconsix.com.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2013 12:48
|
|
