another question: MF is a chunk more cash than 35mm, right?

fontmoss

fontmoss

Messages
1,227
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
Ok in my ongoing saga I made the mistake of reading foodpoison's thread about MF and how the bronica could be a, relatively, cheap alternative to something like a hass. I had thought MF was marginally cheaper than a crack addiction but more time consuming.

So how do the costs compare between a bronica set up (think a hass would be too much sadly) and a nikon Fm2n? I've had a wee look at some second hand sites and seems like nikon body plus 85mm f2 lens (which i can use on my digi body, a not small consideration) would come to about 250/300 without chemicals or scanner and the bronica is in the same sort of bracket? or am i missing something?

are the chemicals you'd use to develop both the same? id imagine the results are pretty far apart in terms of quality? Although even the 35mm is prob going to blow me away compared to my digi.

ok opinions and flamings please! btw id be using the film camera almost entirely for portraits and the like.
 
I bought a Bronica ETRS with waist level finder, 90mm lens and one film back for £230 a few years ago. They seem to be still holding that sort of value.

I got mine from Ffords in Scotland: https://secure.ffordes.com/index.htm

Here is one for £199 https://secure.ffordes.com/Shop/Sto...cd&sub=1&Code=BR&SubCode=EB&id=105377&promo=0

For portraits you will want a longer lens, 150mm or 200mm. This will probably be another £100.

150mm lens: https://secure.ffordes.com/Shop/Sto...ecd&sub=1&Code=BR&SubCode=EL&id=94939&promo=0

and a 200 for a little bit more: https://secure.ffordes.com/Shop/Sto...cd&sub=1&Code=BR&SubCode=EL&id=100617&promo=0

I don't use my ETRS so much now since getting a Mamiya RB67.

If you are using an ETRS for portraits it's good to get a prism finder and a left hand grip. Then it handles like a big 35mm manual camera.


Steve.
 
man its not easy! i think id want the 150mm lens but perhaps i could flog the 90 to keep costs down. Then Id have to get a prism. hmm.

im thinking of taking you up on your generous mamiya offer, had a look at lenses and wondered about getting a nikon convertor but dont know if thats a silly idea (just because cant find a fast longish prime)

also are the chemicals to develop med and 35mm the same or is MF a lot more involved with regard to cost and effort?
 
Exactly the same chemicals. :) The only real difference is the tank. You usually get one MF film in the tank at a time while you can get two 35mm spools in. (Have a look at the Patterson Tank online, you will see what I mean) So in essence the MF is a little more expensive in developing costs because you can actually use the same developer more than once just extending the time a little because if it's slightly reduced efficacy. There are charts and table to tell you what to do. One of the best ones is on the Ilford website.

Hope that helps. :)
 
thanks Ali, im v tempted by the MF route the pictures are incredible but i think i may take steve up on his offer of a mamiya sekor, can't beat free for trying something out!

plus MF looks like could be a bit more cash. *sigh* this is melting my brain!
 
theres a SQB with grip and prism for 250 (*** id want a dif lens)

hmm its close
 
I'm kinda confused, but at the risk of teaching you to suck eggs, I just want to say, there is no cross mounting M/F glass with 35mm, there won't be an adapter they aren't compatible at all.
Also, you might want to take a look at fields of view, 150mm on M/F is nothing like 150mm on 35mm, the same carry on with crop factors we calculate when talking about full frame and cropped sensors applies to M/F.
The sensor (film frame) is massive, which means a 50 is a wide angle an 80 is middle of the road and 150 is only a mild tele.
35mm film is 36mm X 24mm, 6X6 M/F is 56mm X 56mm, a much bigger difference than the usual crop v fullframe chat.
egg suck/end..
I won't be offended if you tell me to bog off :D
 
I won't be offended if you tell me to bog off
Click to expand...

lol not all im asking lots of questions but yeah to clarify i meant 150 on MF as an alternative to a 35mm camera with an 85mm lens.The bronica i looked ta comes with a 75mm lens and id want a 150 which is a bit of a hassle (and more cash)

One of the potential issues is that with the 35mm nikon body i can use the 85mm lens on my digi, clearly not a option with the MF.
 
oh, I see...

A 75 is doable for most things, just working distance would be tighter.

regarding image quality, its doesn't matter what format you use for reasonably sized prints, and interweb jpg's are only as good as the scanner used to reproduce them.
 
For a 6x6 film image as used on the Bronica SQ, roughly double the 35mm camera lens sizes to get the equivalent.

80mm - 90mm would be considered normal view, 40mm - 50mm are considered wide and 150mm and 180mm lenses are often used for portraits.

You are considering 85mm on 35mm film so a 180mm lens for medium format would be about right although the 150mm would probably work for you too.


Steve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top