Related Local Links:
Medium Format Home Page
Medium Format Cameras List Page
Budget Medium Format Pages
Finding Bargain Values
MF Camera Features Selection Guide

Introduction

System Investments

Replacement Value:
$ 9,900   35mm gear (SLR, Rangefinders..)
$13,250   120 rollfilm gear (medium format SLR/RF..)
$16,150   4x5 large format
$ 8,800   digital cameras

While $50,000 or so might seem like a pretty large investment in photography gear, try figuring out how much new replacement medium format gear you can buy for $13,250. A Hasselblad 903SWC superwide will eat up half your medium format budget. A pro 35mm SLR might seem pretty cheap too, but how many fast telephoto lenses can you buy when a 600mm f/4 runs $4,500 to $6,000 or so? Even if you buy the (Minolta) 300mm f/2.8 for $4,000 with a teleconverter, you still blow a pretty big hole in your under $10,000 budget for 35mm SLR gear. While $16k for large format seems reasonably generous, don't forget you probably need your own color darkroom too. And that $8,800 for digital cameras also includes the rapidly obsoleting computer, monitor, storage, and output (printer) devices.

Format Counts, Brands Don't Count as Much

By comparison, few viewers can mistake the difference between an enlargement from a 35mm SLR shot to 11x14" versus a pro quality 6x6cm medium format SLR shot. The larger medium format film size makes a large difference which is readily noticeable. Conversely, standard 8x10" or 11x14" prints from 6x4.5cm SLRs are cropped essentially similarly to 6x6cm SLRs for such rectangular prints. So don't expect to see any major quality differences if you make such prints with either 6x4.5cm or 6x6cm systems.

Other users expect a huge difference in quality in "upgrading" to a 6x7cm SLR, commensurate with the larger camera body size and weight. In this case, the difference in enlargement factors is still a rather modest 20-25% improvement. The benefits may not be entirely obvious until you start printing mainly at 16x20" or even 20x24" or larger. So format is really quite controlling of photographic quality potential. Before you upgrade to medium format, you should have a really good quality related reason or need to do so! You should also rent or try out different formats so you can determine which fits your needs best.

Non-System Buying

My point here is that you can get a lot of return from planning out your final system configuration while considering such issues. Our Selecting Lens Kits pages goes into a number of related issues in selecting lenses. One helpful lens selection tool can be easily made from a measuring tape, some string, and a medium format slide mount (e.g., 6x6cm). The idea is simply that holding the slide mount (or similar cardboard cutout) at 150mm from your eye will give you the equivalent view of a 150mm lens (on 6x6cm). Hold the slide mount at 250mm, and you see what your 250mm lens would see on your camera. Make sense? (See Curing Lens Envy pages for more details).

Pricing Exercise

Surprise!!! As the table below shows, these relatively modest medium format kits will cost more than $15,000 even at mailorder discount prices (B&H Video). Compare that to the average advertising pro photographer's investment of $13,250 in medium format gear. Don't forget there are all kinds of accessories like bellows and prisms that we haven't allowed for here in this simplified pricing exercise.

The second point is that the Bronica system suddenly seems much cheaper when you add on some lenses. The Bronica add-on lenses "only" cost $6,730, while the Hasselblad and Rollei lenses were circa $12,250 and $11,000 respectively. The result is a system cost under $11,000 for the Bronica kit, versus 50% more for either the Hasselblad or Rollei kit.

6x6cm SLR:	Hasselblad 501c/m	Rollei 6008	Bronica SQ-A
camera/lens/back kit	$2,995	$2,999	$2,955
roll film backs (2)	$1,434	$1,390	$1,222
40mm f/4	$3,995	$4,200	$1,800
50mm f/4 (SQ is f/3.5)	$2,696	$1,999	$1,570
150mm f/4	$2,453	$2,199	$1,570
250 f/5.6	$3,107	$2,599	$1,790
system total:	$16,680	$15,386	$10,907

Spousal Heart Attack Pricing Exercise

While you are making the list, record the serial numbers of all that stuff, and the filter thread sizes of all lenses. You may discover that you have neglected some filter needs with some of your lenses. Conversely, you may realize that a simple step-up filter will let you avoid buying some rarely used filters for smaller diameter lenses. The resulting list of lenses and filters can be very useful when shopping online or at camera shows. Now at least you will know what lenses need what filter sizes, and which filters you have which can be mounted on each lens. Naturally, when you are buying new gear, you have to consider what the impact of new filter sizes will be on your budget too. Some systems use the same filter size for most of their lenses, while others use three or four filter sizes.

This exercise is also good for insurance related planning. Many of us have only a minimal replacement at depreciated cost insurance policy. So if you bought your Hasselblad 500c for $400 in 1984, many policies would treat it as fully depreciated and worth only 10% of original $400 cost. Try buying a replacement Hasselblad 500c with WLF, body, 12 back, and 80mm lens for $40 today - or even the full original $400 you originally paid. You may not be able to find an exact replacement, and end up having to spring for a Hasselblad 501c/m for $2,995.

So estimating your total replacement cost for equivalent current gear can be an interesting exercise. Go through a few camera gear catalogs such as Porter's or B&H Photo Video to be sure you don't miss any major categories. Most of us will be amazed at the new cost of small items like 67mm polarizer (linear) filters which may run $20 to $75 each. A small tool kit of lens and filter wrenches, cleaning materials, and screwdrivers may represent $50 to $100 in a small bag. Many camera bags cost $75 to $350, not counting an accessory Optech strap or non-slip shoulder pad. It all adds up!

Dual Use Technology - 35mm and Medium Format

Chances are good that some items can be used on your medium format system, but with some further expenditures. So your 35mm SLR tripod might be adequate, but you may now see the need for a ball head too. Or your Vivitar strobe may be powerful enough, but you will need a different kind of flash bracket for your Bronica or Hasselblad than for your Nikon or Canon rig.

A common question is whether you should sell your 35mm SLR kit to afford buying more medium format gear. The answer is almost always NO! The 35mm SLR has some unique optics that are hard or impossible to find or afford in medium format, including fisheyes, most zoom lenses, and longer telephoto lenses. Keep in mind that a 300mm lens on many medium format systems is roughly equivalent to a 200mm lens on most 35mm SLRs in use. If you can shoot lifesize on 35mm, you may be able to do many such tasks using your 35mm kit rather than having to buy expensive bellows and tubes for your new medium format rig. The idea here is that it is much cheaper to use each format - 35mm and medium format - for its strengths, while using the other format to cover areas of relative weakness. Make sense?

All Medium Format Systems are Not Created Equal

My point here is that someone trying to do macrowork with the Bronica SQ-A may be at a disadvantage against someone using either the Hasselblad or Rollei systems. The situation is actually worse, since there are a lot of older tubes and accessories for Hasselblad macrophotography, and a whole series of Zeiss Luminars with bellows mount for the Rollei SLRs too.

Sometimes the system offers the capabilities you need, but at a totally unobtainable price. For example, you can't get a 1,000mm OEM lens for Hasselblad or Bronica leaf shutter cameras. But you can buy a 1,000mm OEM lens for the Rollei. That's the good news. The bad news is the lens costs $20,999 at mailorder discount (B&H), and you have to pay up front before they start to make one for you. Forget about renting the one example they use for catalog photos too. So while something may be theoretically available, the reality is the item may be impossible to find, rent, or buy.

Do you need to do some specialty area of photography? For example, there aren't ANY current shortwave ultraviolet lenses for medium format cameras available new, and most of the 35mm SLR variants are also out of current production. When you can find the Zeiss UV Sonnar 105mm f/4.3 quartz optic for shortwave ultraviolet studies, the asking price sounds like more than most new cars ($20k+). In this case, you simply work backwards, finding the lens and then buying it and the system to use it as an afterthought!

Many people are interested in doing architectural and cityscape photography. Don't assume that you will be able to find an affordable shift lens for such work in every medium format system. Conversely, I often recommend folks wanting to do such work consider a technical mini-view camera such as Horseman or Linhof with 6x9cm rollfilm backs. If you must have a shift lens on medium format, the three wide angle shift lenses (45mm, 55mm, 65mm) for Kiev-88/60 is the lowest cost and broadest set of offerings (if the limited shift is sufficient). Again, my point here is that if you intend to do some specialty areas of photography, it pays to carefully consider what lenses and system elements you need, and pick the system that has them.

Case Study - Bronica's Unloved GS-1 6x7cm SLR

Start by checking out the available 6x7cm SLR lenses. The first thing you notice is that there are no fisheye lenses for the Bronica GS-1. The widest lens for the Bronica is a 50mm which costs circa $1,700. By comparison the 45mm and 55mm Pentax 6x7cm lenses cost only $900 (focal plane), and even the Mamiya RB/RZ67 50mm lenses are less.

The Bronica telephoto offerings are equally limited, with the 250mm f/5.6 for $1,700 and the 500mm f/8 for an astonishing $11,220. By comparison, the Mamiya RZ/RB 500mm f/8 is $4,540, and even Mamiya's 500mm f/6 is only $6,200. That's half the price for a faster leaf shutter lens that is also an APO design. The focal plane Pentax 67 is clearly the champion for low cost telephotos in this format, with their 1000mm f/8 costing under $6,000.

Similarly, you can get a nice soft focus lens for your Pentax 67 or Mamiya RB/RZ67 portraiture sessions, but not for your Bronica GS-1. Do you need a shift lens for architectural work? Again, you are out of luck with Bronica, while both Pentax 67 and Mamiya RB/RZ competitors have such offerings. The only zooms in 6x7cm are not on the Bronica. Even the Bronica 2X and 1.4X teleconverters are over $900 - apiece.

I am suggesting that the Bronica GS-1 is unloved because many buyers discover one or more of these limitations, and feel forced to trade out. If your analysis of your photographic needs is such that the Bronica GS-1 meets those needs, then you might get some great buys in mid-range used optics and low usage GS-1 camera bodies. But Pentax 67 offers lower cost and more extensive optics, thanks to its focal plane design, ranging from fisheyes (under $900) through the most extensive telephoto offerings in medium format SLRs. The Mamiya RB/RZ offer great closeup capability (thanks to built-in bellows) and rotating backs, plus an extensive lens line including fisheyes, shift lenses, soft focus, and APO telephotos missing in the Bronica lineup. The Bronica GS-1 lenses are a bit cheaper than the Mamiya RB/RZ leaf shutter offerings, but the differences over a three or four lens kit is only a modest savings.

Now compare the situation for Bronica ETR and its 6x4.5cm SLR competitors - Pentax 645 and Mamiya 645 (ignoring the new Contax 645 due to few lenses available yet). The Bronica ETR is a leaf shutter lensed system, while the Mamiya and Pentax are focal plane models. The few Mamiya and Pentax leaf shutter specialty lenses are often more costly than the Bronica equivalents. The Bronica ETR has one of two fisheyes in 6x4.5cm format. There are multiple zooms for the Bronica ETR. The longer 500mm f/8 telephoto for Bronica is only $3,200 in one variant, while the focal plane 600mm f/5.6 for pentax is over $5,000. In short, the Bronica ETR system offers some unique features such as leaf shutters while competing on the full range of optics from fisheyes to long telephotos at competitive prices.

The situation for the Bronica 6x6cm SQ-A series SLR against its competitors is more similar to the Bronica ETR(s). It has competitive optics, ranging from the lowest cost fisheye (35mm f/3.5) to a 500mm f/8 that is $1,000+ less than the Rollei and $2,600 less than the Hasselblad model. The cost for a typical Bronica SQ-A system is substantially less than either of the Zeiss lens using Rollei or Hasselblad system costs.

Analysis of Holes

Most medium format SLR owners face similar hurdles, with often fewer options than Hasselblad has offered its owners. The simple solution for most of us is to switch formats to a 6x9cm mini-view camera. Since these cameras have built-in bellows with standard tilts and shift movements, the perspective controls for architecture are readily available. The cameras use rollfilm backs, ranging from 6x4.5cm to 6x6cm, 6x7cm, up through 6x9cm and even 6x12cm in some panoramic models. Many view camera lenses can be mounted for such operation, and these view camera lenses in shutters are relatively low cost. For example, the same Rodenstock lenses for the Hasselblad Arcbody are available in the same leaf shutters mounted for various miniview cameras such as Linhof or Horseman, but at a saving of nearly $1,000+ US each (circa 40% saving over mailorder lenses). So for many users, the mini-view and technical camera approach offers more flexibility at significantly lower overall cost. For even less money, you can find any number of 4x5" cameras of the press camera or field camera design that are even cheaper and more flexible too.

Finding the weaknesses or holes in any given camera system may involve considerable research. Thanks to Mr. Danny Gonzalez, we have a series of pros and cons medium format camera reviews which highlight some of the better known "gotcha's" for many medium format cameras. Study of competing systems, such as we have done above, also provides many insights of relative strengths and weaknesses in capabilities. You need to be even more careful about the holes in your system, since they may prove irritating limitations over time, than with the strengths that you need and demand from the system.

Cheating with Lens Adapters

The superwide adapters typically are 0.42X factors, turning the 80mm normal lens into a 34mm equivalent full frame fisheye (some setups may vignette in the corners). This optic will often cover 100-110+ degrees, but with considerable fisheye distortion effects visible. These adapters are modest cost ($25-50 US used). Granted, the images will have more distortion, be more subject to flare, and softer in the edges than a prime medium format optic. But you can't buy ultrawide angle lenses with these semifisheye effects in most OEM lines.

More realistically, most of us use these fisheye and semifisheye adapters to get some fun fisheye effects without spending a lot of money on them. For the number of times we use these adapters, it would not be worth buying the nearest equivalent OEM fisheye lens for $3,000 or so. You can also use the relatively modest 0.5X very wide angle and 0.6X wide angle adapters with your 80mm normal lens to provide a 40mm and 50mm equivalent lens. These adapters can help tide you over until you can save up and buy the desired wide angle lens(es). Using them can also help you find out how you "see" photographically. You may discover that you really "see" subjects and compositions more as telephoto lenses do. In such a case, you might opt to use the adapters for your modest wide angle shot requirements, and put your money into the telephoto lenses. Conversely, you may "see" more wide angle subjects, and so prefer to use a telephoto adapter and/or teleconverter for those infrequent telephoto shots.

Lens Mount Adaptations

Another option is to do lens hacking. In this case, you modify view camera or other lenses with adequate coverage to work in manual mode on your camera body. The most popular conversions include some low cost telephoto lenses in the 400mm and 500mm range adapted to various medium format focal plane camera bodies. If the lens is from a view camera, twin lens reflex, or folder with its own integral leaf shutter, then these lenses can also be used with leaf shutter camera bodies (e.g., Hasselblad 500c/m). You can also use a microscope adapter, which includes a camera mount and leaf shutter mechanism but no glass, or make one by removing the glass from a damaged standard lens with working leaf shutter and diaphragm. Now you can mount many telephoto and macro lenses and instruments (microscope, telescope..) to your camera. You can even create some shift lenses or tilt-shift lenses with the right starting optics.

In general, these tricks work best with short telephoto and longer telephoto lenses. A typical 90mm wide angle lens on 4x5" is actually a short telephoto on 6x6cm, where 75-80mm is the normal lens used on 6x6cm. Really wide view camera lenses such as the 47mm f/5.6 XL Super Angulon require mounting the lens within a few inches of the film focal plane, which is impossible on most medium format SLRs due to the moving mirror design. So now you know why I use fisheye and ultrawide adapters to cover the wide angle holes in my lens lineups, and lens mount adapters or "lens hacking" to cover the macro and telephoto end of things.

Mix and Match

I use a number of Bronica S2/EC camera bodies with a full complement of lenses. The Bronica cameras use a focal plane shutter, so lenses are relatively cheap due to the lack of leaf shutters. There is one 105mm leaf shutter lens available for portraiture on the Bronica. But if I really want to do a lot of fill-in flash synch portraiture, then the Bronica is not a great choice. It has a rather slow flash synch speed in the 1/45th to 1/60th second range. In bright sunlight, it is easy to get ghosting images. So I have a Kowa kit with four short to long telephoto and 110mm macro lenses plus short extension tube to cover the fill-in flash portraiture work. I have several wide angle lenses too. However, the Kowa tilt/shift bellows and 500mm long telephoto are very pricey and rare.

That's where my Bronica comes in. The extension tubes, lens reversing rings, and standard and deluxe tilt/shift bellows make Bronica a great choice for closeup work. I can use TTL metering prisms for exposure. The bellows convert the standard lenses to zoom from infinity to very closeup work, with the option for tilt/shift controls to put the focal plane where I want it on the macro-subject. I have found it easy to adapt all kinds of bellows lenses, movie camera lenses, microscope objectives, and eyepieces for use in macrophotography. In short, I would be hard pressed to find any medium format rig with a more flexible macrophotography capability for anything close to the low cost of my Bronica system.

Similarly, the Bronica focal plane shutter makes it easy to use long focus and telephoto lenses with this system. The original OEM lenses include a number of longer focal length lenses, including many modest cost optics by Komura and other third party makers. I have also found it easy to adapt lenses such as a 500mm f/8-f/32 preset lens for medium format use on my Bronica (see homebrew lens adaptations). I have a variety of 135mm, 150mm, 200mm, 250mm, 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, and even a 2400mm f/9 telescope capability. These long lenses fill in the holes in the Kowa offerings, while costing less in total than the rare Kowa 500mm lens and matching 2X teleconverter.

When I wanted to do some motorized radio control remote telephotography of birds and small critters, I couldn't use either my Bronica or Kowa systems. So I expanded my Hasselblad 500c/80mm system to include a low cost ($300) Hasselblad EL/M body with motorized body and a 250mm older C lens. In this case, the older Hasselblad body was the least expensive way to get a motorized setup, taking advantage of my existing spare backs and viewfinders and accessories. The 250mm lens is often the least costly in the Hasselblad lineup after the 80mm normal lens, and works with modest cost 2X teleconverters too.

My points here have related to mixing and matching camera systems so that the strengths of one system cover up the weaknesses in the other. The Kowa system offers lots of short telephoto portrait lenses with leaf shutter flash synch for fill-in flash needs. The Bronica system covers the macrophotography and longer telephoto needs. I also use a view camera for its strengths in perspective control.

For panoramic projects, I use an ultrawide camera (Veriwide 100) with the equivalent of an 18mm ultrawide lens on a 35mm SLR. My study of competing 6x12cm and even 6x17cm cameras showed the Veriwide would get more subject matter on film, with minimal distortion, and permit enlargements very nearly as large as the competing much larger and more costly panoramic cameras. Best of all, used Veriwide 100s often cost less than a fourth the cost of other ultrawide or panoramic medium format cameras. Again, another system analysis of panoramic cameras using Meehan's Panoramic Photography guidebook led me to an unexpected solution.

Mixing Formats and Camera Types

Each of these choices has many features with characteristic strengths and weaknesses too. The medium format user can justify a number of these different formats and models for various photographic needs and projects.

Sometimes it is more fun and lots cheaper to switch rather than fight. For example, the Kiev 30mm fisheye lens for 6x6cm can be bought for only $200 or so. A Kiev 60 or Kiev 88 SLR kit can be bought brand new in the box for $150 to $300 and up. In this case, the price of a Kiev 60 camera plus 30mm fisheye lens will be less than the sales/VAT tax on a similar Zeiss design fisheye for your Hasselblad or Rollei SLR.

Similarly, you can use digital or darkroom techniques to "stitch" together a series of photographs into a panoramic shot. But there are many reasons and situations where a panoramic camera is the ideal or only solution. So you may be justified in adding another camera to your kit to do panoramic photography.

Many photographers also like to have a low weight camera such as the new Bronica RF645 rangefinder for use when traveling. Maybe you don't want to take kilobucks worth of Mamiya or Pentax 67 gear into some seedy sections of town, fearing theft? While these concerns may not seem to influence your main system camera choices, you may find that research may suggest options worth considering. For example, you may be able to use your Pentax 67 lenses on your backup or traveling Pentax 645 camera with a full-autodiaphragm adapter. But if your main studio rig is a Mamiya RB/RZ67, then your options might be more limited.

Conversely, buying a secondary travel or field camera might relax some of the constraints in buying your main system camera. For example, I might decide on a Bronica SQ-A system to use for both traveling and studio work. But if I planned on using a Bronica RF645 for my traveling camera, I might find the Mamiya RB/RZ67 the better studio system camera for me. My point here is that you aren't limited to only being able to buy one medium format camera. It may well be that a combination of cameras will let you meet your needs better than by selecting the best compromise system camera.

Non-System and Small System Cameras

Twin lens reflex cameras are also limited to their original optics, except for the few interchangeable lens models (e.g., Mamiya C22/33x series). Many medium format new users get started with a TLR, and are surprised by how much general photography can be done with a single lens. TLRs are also very light and compact, and very different in handling from 35mm SLRs. Most TLRs offer fill-in flash sych at any shutter speed, which is a nice feature for many 35mm SLR users to discover and user. The large negative size and high image quality is also a plus for these users. The number of accessories for most TLRs is rather limited, making them even more affordable for many users.

A small system camera can also be appealing. For example, I recently splurged and bought a Koni-Omega 6x7cm rangefinder, primarily because its Mamiya leaf shutter optics were so highly rated. At the same time, I got the RO200 body with interchangeable magazines. But while I can get some 120 and even 220 backs, there isn't a polaroid back for this camera series. And there are only four lenses, with three being common and low cost optics (one 58mm wide angle, the 90mm normal, and the 180mm telephoto). The camera comes with a flash grip and rangefinder setup. The list of accessories is rather short too.

I could have purchased a bigger system camera such as the Mamiya Universal rangefinder. I would have had a number of lens choices, at generally higher costs, if not of higher quality (per Chris Perez's tests). The Mamiya Universal can take a polaroid back, while the Standard 23 model provides some back movements with a ground glass back. I could buy 6x7 and even 6x9cm backs. The Polaroid back requires different lenses (3) for full coverage beyond 6x9cm. There are lots more accessories too.

My point here is that I picked the Koni-Omega 6x7cm rangefinder because it had great optics, but also because it was a limited system camera. A three lens kit has historically been popular with many past 35mm SLR and (Leica) rangefinder users for the classic wide-angle/normal/telephoto lens kit. I can swap out backs and lenses, rather than carrying a heavy spare Koni-Omega body (which is just a shell with rangefinder optics). A three lens kit is sufficient for most needs, while the total investment may range around $500+ for 3 lenses, camera body, and spare backs. The logical end of this sequence is what I call the "80% solution". The idea here is that you can pickup even the most expensive medium format cameras with the normal lens for relatively modest costs. As we saw with the 6x6cm examples, the Hasselblad and Rollei 6008 models with Zeiss normal lens was within $50 of the new discount mailorder cost of the Bronica SQ-A series model. So long as you don't splurge on any other lenses and accessories, you can still do a lot of photography with this minimalist camera setup. Yet if you later decide to expand your equipment and photographic horizons, you can do so. If after a systems analysis of your photographic equipment needs you decide you should buy a different camera system, you will lose the least amount of money from selling off the basic camera kit. In the meantime, you can do a lot of photography with the minimalist camera system.

Conclusion

Some cameras such as the Pentax 67 are well known for their telephoto options, while others such as Bronica ETR(S) may be the better choice for many 6x4.5cm users wanting full flash synch with all lenses. Unpopular systems such as the Bronica GS-1 6x7cm SLR may be a great buy, if they match your needs, or a likely candidate for early sale at a loss if you need a fisheye and none is available for that model. The fault is not the camera system, but ours for picking the wrong camera with a poor fit to our photographic needs.

Finally, no one camera system however extensive is a complete solution to all your photographic needs. The best solution of all may be "mixing and matching", using the strengths of one camera system for projects where a second camera system falls short. You should keep your 35mm SLR system, since it supplements weak areas in most medium format systems. Similarly, you can justify multiple medium format systems to use the strength of each camera or format, while minimizing the limitations of each. So we end up not with one optimal camera system, but rather with a series of overlapping camera systems which overcome the limitations and weaknesses of each to enable us to do any kind of photography we need to do from a position of strength.

Related Postings

Scott Hicks wrote:

> Now that I have approval from my wife to acquire a Hasselblad system  with
> one lens ... why not go for a two lens approval?
>
> Any suggestions for a two lens initial set up combo with a 503CW?
>
> Applications include outdoor portraits, interiors (exteriors  eventually),
> and landscapes.

I think you're going about this all wrong. You should decide what setup -- bodies, magazines, lenses, etc. -- that you ultimately want or need, and then ask the list which TWO lenses of those you want you should get first.

With a strictly two lens system and your photo requirements, you're going to end up with lenses that are too widely spaced apart like a 50 and 150 someone suggested. If, for example, you decide on a 3 or 4 lens system and get just two of them to begin with, you'll eventually end up with better lens spacing. Just add the other lenses later after your wife has fully recovered from her nervous breakdown after seeing the cost. :-)

--
Patrick Bartek
NoLife Polymath Group
[email protected]

From Bronica Mailing List:
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001
From: "Kelvin" [email protected]
Subject: Re: Which Bronica to enter MF?

It really depends on your budget.

The S2A probably comes more highly recommended, being mechanical, than the ECTL ... which is electronic, but for which accesories will also be cheaper due to lower demand. No matter which way you go, given their age, they will need a good servicing. Listmembers suggests Ruth of Bald Mountain (did I get that right?) does a good job . So factor in a budget for that.

Myself, I got a GS1. It does cost more... but ifyour needs are limited ( I have 4 lenses, 2 bodies, AE prism and speed-grip) , but in contrast to what they cost new, their depreciation is often in the 60-70% range. I picked up my entire kit for US$3000 - that's for a 50,65,100,150 ... 2 bodies, WLF, AE finder,3 filmbacks and speedgrip. I like the later cameras (SQ,ETR,GS) precisely because they are leaf-shuttered lenses... and I can hence x-sync at all speeds. Fill-flash outdoors is important to me.

...

From: "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001
Subject: Re: pricing the full system... Re: Bronica SQ-Ai thoughts?

Robert Monaghan wrote:

> it is pretty important to price out the whole projected system cost; a
> hasselblad system with six lenses, for example, is going to be quite a  bit
> more than most Bronica systems with 6 similar optics, even if you avail
> yourself of older used lenses, let alone new ones. You can also find  some
> surprises in "missing lenses" (see
> http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/available.html for lens availability
> tables) and accessories such as extension tubes that cost $500 and so  on.
> Conversely, the 6x7cm systems may be surprisingly cheaper than many  6x6cm
> esp gs-1 vs SQ or RB/RZ vs rollei 6k etc.

And very often pricing the whole system includes the extra cost/loss of value incurred by trading in the second choice MF-system, and buying a Hasselblad system after all.

Sometimes it really would be better to get stuck in the expensive system right away, and just be patient.

From Hasselblad Mailing List:
Date: 9 Apr 2001
From: Patrick Bartek [email protected]
Subject: Re: Total System - If you could have just TWO ...

Scott Hicks wrote:

> Patrick,
>
> Don't worry!  Although my posted question wasn't clear on this point - I  do
> plan eventually to have a total system comprising of more than two  lenses.
> In fact if I win the lottery, I will buy them all, and spacing won't be  an
> issue!

Okay. More than a TWO lens system. How about my setup? Just 3 lenses.

I've been shooting professionally with it for about 15 years, and I can do about 90% of what I need to with it: mostly corporate, architectural (for serious architectural, I use 4x5), product and table top, industrial, executive portraits, PR, theatrical and show people publicity and headshots.

SWC, 60, 150. I bought the 60 and 150 first. Added the SWC about a year or so later. I find the 150 a little long for my taste, and the 120 a little short. The 135 would have been ideal (That's the focal length I favored when the Mamiya TLR was my MF camera.), but it's not available in a focusing mount. So, I get by with the 150.

I chose the SWC over the 40, because the SWC is not just a lens, but a body, too; and it has virtually no distortion, very rectilinear -- perfect for architectural, and shooting large, mostly flat things, when there's not enough room to back up anymore and you don't want the verticals curved.

PS. If you win the lottery, I think you should buy everyone, who responded to your queries, a new 'Blad setup. The longer and more informative the reply, the more equipment the responder gets. Sound fair?

From: "M. P. Brennan" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001
Subject: Re: Which medium format camera to buy

I have Mamiya M645 and Hasselblad kits. I slightly prefer the Hassy because I can use fill flash at any speed and the square format keeps me from having to constantly rotate the camera for portrait shots.

That said, my Mamiya kit cost me only a fraction of what the Hassy kit cost, and the results are very comparable.

Advantages of the Hassy:

1) Leaf shutter in lens allows fill flash at any shutter speed

2) Square format (for reason listed above)

3) Zeiss optics are unbeatable

4) Equipment holds its value (you can buy stuff on eBay, use it a few years and get all your money back for it on eBay)

Disadvantages of Hassy:

1) High cost of lenses (each of which contains a shutter)

2) High system cost makes you more gun-shy about taking it out into the cold, cruel world

Advantages of Mamiya M645, M645J, M645-1000S:

1) Very inexpensive. The bodies are so inexpensive that you can buy one for less than the cost of a removable back for the 645 Super or Pro. Instead of spare backs, you can have an entire spare camera body.

2) Very reliable

3) Can use Mamiya lenses and (with adapter) all Pentacon-mount lenses (Carl Zeiss Jena, Kiev 60, etc.)

4) Focal plane shutter means lenses don't have a shutter, so they're much less expensive. Also has a synch speed of 1/60th, compared to 1/30th for some other medium format focal-plane cameras.

5) Leaf-shutter lenses are available (at a much higher price) to give some benefits of Hassy system

6) Holds its value

7) Easy to hold and handle

Disadvantages of Mamiya M645, etc:

1) Non-removable film backs (solved by purchasing extra bodies for less than $200 each)

2) Early non-metered prisms were prone to internal desilvering of reflective surface

3) Difficult to use waist level finder in portrait mode

While I think that Bronica makes good, solid equipment, these days, they tend to depreciation more when compared to other brands. This statement will get me soundly flamed, but I believe it to be true.

If you're looking for top-of-the-line-money-is-no-object quality, Hasselblad is the way to go. If you want excellent quality at a very affordable price, a strong case can be made for the Mamiya M645 and close relatives.

-Mike

[email protected] wrote

> I'm thinking about making the jump from 35mm to medium format. I would
> appreciate any opinions from this group on good medium format cameras
> and maybe which ones to stay away from.
>
> Thanks,

From: [email protected] (Brent) Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm Subject: Lens System Price Comparisons Date: 11 Dec 2002 Recently (meaning sometime in December, 2002), a statement was made on rec.photo.equipment.35mm that while Pentax makes high quality lenses, the Pentax system is more expensive than other systems. I was curious about that statement and decided to do some research. First, the statement needed to be turned into a hypothesis: Pentax lenses are more expensive than other manufacturers lenses. I selected seven lenses from the Pentax line: * Pentax SMC-FA 20/2,8 * Pentax SMC-FA 24/2 AL (IF) * Pentax SMC-FA 28/2,8 AL * Pentax SMC-FA 50/1,4 * Pentax SMC-FA 85/1,4 (IF) * Pentax SMC-FA 135/2,8 IF * Pentax SMC-FA 200/2,8 ED IF And then tried to select lenses from other manufacturers that provide the same capabilities of the Pentax equivalent. In selecting, I attempted to 1. Select a lens with the same focal length 2. Select a lens with the same max. aperature value 3. Select a lens with the same mechanical characteristics A disclaimer: my personal camera is a Pentax ME-Super, and I most often shoot with a 24mm Vivitar lens. I'm certainly not a high-end shooter and I really don't know anything about the Nikon or Canon systems. I recognize that I may not have the experience and exposure to perform this sort of an analysis. I was able to identify equivalent focal length lenses from the rivals, but ran into trouble with the max. aperature value. Since it is the Pentax capability I was attempting to reproduce in the other lens, I chose to select a lens with a larger aperature, thinking that one could always stop-down. Mechanical characteristics petty much boiled down to "auto-focus". I was able to find equivalent auto-focus lens equivalent for each Pentax, except for in the Nikkor 24mm range. I recognize that selecting lenses of larger max. aperature severely tilts the price comparison (as is evident in the Canon 24mm and 85mm lens selections). But, keeping the hypothesis in mind, I really wanted to find a lens that could duplicate the Pentax lens capability. In one instance (200mm), I needed to select a (Nikon) lens of smaller aperature (f4 instead of f2.8). This (Nikon) lens is also a macro lens, so this comparison is not very valid. I could select the Pentax 200mm macro to compare against. I also ran into a problem with identifying a Nikon auto-focus 24mm lens. I tried to factor in a measure of optical quality by dividing the price by the PhotoDo score for a particular lens (if one exists). This may or may not be a valid thing to do. Prices were taken from BHPhoto on either 10-Dec-2002 or 11-Dec-2002. There could be a skew introduced here if one manufacturer is running some sort of seasonal promotion. The chart and graphs are presented at http://www.goneset.com/lens/lensComparison.htm I feel that they do not validate the hypothesis, but I recognize the limitations in my methodology. I'd appreciate any help in selecting lenses for comparison or in refining the methodology. Thanks, -Brent