Film and Darkroom User

Film and Darkroom User (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/index.php)
-   Cameras - medium format (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   Economic route into 6x7 ? (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=10914)

Chrisvclick 9th March 2016 03:50 PM

Economic route into 6x7 ?
 
Hi all,
As well as my Rolleicord, I have been using a Bronica 645 for a while now, But want to go bigger negative for landscapes. Dont think finances alllow me to go to 4x5, similar problem going to 6x9, my enlarger wont go that big..
However, there is 6x7 of course. My enlarger will just about manage that, But is the extra 10mm worth the extra hassle and cost ?.
If it is, what is the best bang for the buck ?. Tried a Pentax 67, just bout recovered from the Hernia and didn't like the "kick". Was fun otherwise :).
Is there anything "economic" that is reasonable quality or do I have to go the Bronica/Mamiya route ?..

Collas 9th March 2016 04:02 PM

The Fujifilm GW670 is available in three different generations - Fujica GM670 and the Fujifilm GW670 II and III. And there are other sizes, such as 6x 8, and 6 x 9 to choose from, too. And the choice of "standard" GW and wide-angle GSW for some of the other film sizes. They don't have interchangeable lenses, however.

Nick

Lostlabours 9th March 2016 04:29 PM

The 6x7 format won't give you a particularly noticeable increase in quality compared to your 645.

I thought about moving up from my Mamiya 645's about 30 years ago to an RB67, in the end I just went to 5x4 instead which I already used for work. That did give me the increased quality I wanted.

At the moment I'm printing 645 negatives shot in 1986, the quality is excellent but I 'd sometimes run out of DOF for some images I wanted to make and knew I needed a camera with movements.

Ian

Alan Clark 9th March 2016 04:54 PM

Chris, it is easy to get bogged down and confused with this. I think you need to ask yourself what size prints you would like to do. If the answer is "20 x 16" then , yes, you probably could benefit from the bigger negative. But with 12 x 16 or smaller I would have thought you would be fine with the cameras you have.
I have generally found in photography that changing gear may solve one problem, but often creates others. I had used 6x6 format cameras for years, but, in pursuit of the bigger negative, bought a Pentax 67. I never got a sharp picture with it. at slow shutter speeds on a tripod, for landscape photography. ( Because of shutter vibration) So I swapped it for an RB67. This camera gives wonderful looking prints, I've done 20 x 16s with it that look really nice. But it has its drawbacks. It is very heavy to carry around. And if you like to use the hyperfocal settings on a lens to get max. depth of field, then you can't with this camera, as it focusses with bellows...But RBs are cheap, and a delight to use, being all mechanical. The Bronica 67 may be a better bet, but I can't say because I have never used one.
You are probably more confused than ever now! But keep your intended print size in mind.

Alan

DaveP 9th March 2016 05:07 PM

Best bang for your buck in 6x7 is almost certainly a Mamiya RB67 outfit. Loads of them around as they were popular with studios back in the day. Suits landscape work as they are heavy.

The other thing I'd look at is a Fuji GX680 with a 6x7 back. These are very cheap for what you're getting. Has tilt, which can solve the DoF problems inherent with medium format. You don't have to stop down so far, leading to sharper images. Again, these are big heavy motherf***ers though!

Richard Gould 9th March 2016 05:18 PM

If you want to dip your toe in a bigger size then why not try a Folder? there are a lot that take 68, just slightly bigger, and reasonably priced that would give you an idea, although, To be honest, the difference in quality between your Rollei at 66, or even 645, you would be very hard pressed to find a real difference, I have tried it, got a Ensign Selfix 820 and the only difference I could find was the shape of the negative, If you want to go bigger than 66 to get better quality the LF is the way to go, Personally, I am quite content shooting 645 or 66, with various Rollei's and folders
Richard

MartyNL 9th March 2016 05:29 PM

Deleted

Alan Clark 9th March 2016 05:40 PM

A 6x9 negative exposed with a good lens would be a definite jump up from 645. But the OP doesn't have a 6x9 enlarger....6x7 is his limit.

Alan

Lostlabours 9th March 2016 09:27 PM

Look at the maths the long edge of 645 and then 67, it's only 1/6th longer for the 6x7 negative. I agree with Alan that a 6x9 will show a slightly better jump.

If you're shooting B&W I'd suggest looking at switching films, if you can shoot Pan F rather than a 100 or faster ISO film you'll see a much greater increase in quality (using the Mirror lock and a tripod) than the insignificant difference between 645 and 67.

Ian

mpirie 10th March 2016 07:33 AM

+1 for the RB system if you want the best bang for your buck/pound.

It's not a light system, but the quality is superb if you stick it on a tripod and are looking to slow down your shooting process.

Mike


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.