I currently have a wonderful 35mm SLR,but am VERY interested in getting into the medium format. With all the advertising out there I feel like I am floundering and don't know where to begin, or what to look for. I know this seems like a very general request for help, but ANY advice would be welcome!!

Thank you very much!

-- Carri Pickett (candc@means.net), June 05, 1998

Answers

Maybe a "Classic"

I was also recently bitten by the medium format bug, but after shopping several mail order and local photo stores I found that my budget wouldn't permit it; thus, I began looking into the "classics."

I stumbled on a very nice Rolleicord III TLR at an antique shop for under $50. Its lens is a 75mm Xenar 3.5, which produces images that I have been very pleased with. (I've heard to steer clear of those with the Zeiss Triotar lens.) Granted, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of today's models, but it has proved an inexpensive and satisfying alternative. Perhaps an idea worth consideration in order to explore if medium format is for you.

-- Wes Sechler (wes_sechler@muccmail.missouri.edu), June 06, 1998.

I second the advice about a twin lens reflex (TLR). I have a beautiful little Mamiya C220 and am very impressed with the quality of the optics. It is also light enough to be easily handheld. If you decide to look into a used SLR then here's some odd advice given to me by a trusted salesman. Since SLR's have large, bulky moving parts they have a tendency to wear quickly and are expensive to replace. Therefore you should try and find out the history of each camera, the same way you would for a car. Also, camera's owned by hobbyists tend to have less wear than those of professionals because they were generally used less and pampered more. Good luck with your search.

-- Andy Laycock (agl@intergate.bc.ca), June 06, 1998.

I vote for a TLR also. I started out with a Yashica LM that my Dad bought in the 50's. It was very elementary, and the light meter didn't work anymore, so I used a hand held meter. It gave me taste for the possibilities of the larger format, and the price was right. Once I progressed to the point that I felt I needed lenses of different focal lengths, I only need to learn a new camera system, and not how to work with a new film format. I think it wpuld be appropriate at this point to insert a Surgeon Generals warning, " CAUTION, the use of a larger format negative can, and will, be hazardous to your pocket book." I really have enjoyed the meduim and large format systems I aquired along the way, and probably would have paid no more attention to the warning thatn you will!

-- Marv Thompson (mthompson@clinton.net), June 07, 1998.

I started medium format a little over on year ago with a Yashica Mat 124G. The optics are superb, but it has a fixed lens, so I upgraded last fall to a Mamiya C330 system and gave the Yashica Mat to my 12-year-old son. Not having read Marv's warning, I recently purchased a 4x5 camera and have the Mamiya system on eBay's auction site to finance my darkroom expansion.

If you are serious about this, get a Mamiya TLR as a starter. You can add lenses as your budget allows, and the images you'll get will far surpass 35mm images. You'll need to use your 35mm camera as a light meter until you buy a spot meter, but it will work, and you can always use the spot meter for your 4x5 when you decide 6x6 negatives are too small.

-- Darron Spohn (sspohn@concentric.net), June 08, 1998.

Start with something relatively inexpensive to test the waters. Stick with 35mm for extremes of focal length. I started MF with a YashicaMat 124 (non G) my brother bought at the Navy PX in '72 for $64. When I left college I got a Mamiya C22. I currently have two C330 bodies and six lenses. The few things that really need an SLR I just do in 35mm.

-- Tim Brown (brownt@ase.com), June 09, 1998.

Like so many others I have a superb SLR (Minolta 700i)with various lenses, but wanted to go medium. We had an old Yashicaflex TLR in the family, so started on that, with excellent results. More recently I have found a Mamiya C330, which, though it weighs a tonne on field trips, has been superb, particularly for close up work in black and white. For that you need a "Paramender" a Mamiya accessory that fits between Tripod and camera, and allows you to photograph through the taking lens exactly what you saw through the viewing lens. Clumsy, but very satisfying. I would recommend frequenting church fairs. A friend of mine saw my gear, and bought me an old Meopta TLR in perfect order for $2! Perhaps that is just the New Zealand countryside!

-- Richard Studholme (richard.studholme@xtra.co.nz), June 18, 1998.

I have used both a Contax and a Leica, but on going back to medium format have found that an old Rolleiflex TLR with a 3.5 T essar lens is superb.

The point however is to use a reasonable film -say Ilford FP4 or even Kodak Tech Pan rated at ASA 25- develop in Rodinal at 150:1- and print in an enlarger with a good lens -say aCompnpn S or equivalnt. After you have seen the richness and detail in your prints, you will not want to struggle with small negatives again. Also the Rollei is easy to use. Heresy....You dont need interchangeable lenses. Take a look at the work done by Fritz Henle, Phillipe Halsman, Penn or Avedon and you will see what I mean

-- david wilder (mdw@radiant.net), January 04, 1999.

I too vote for the TLR. I have a C220 and it is everything people here have said. One camera that is not mentioned is the 2x3 Speed Graphic. While it is a little (slightly) larger than the TLR's, you do have the possiblities of interchangeable lenses, rollfilm backs (using 2x2 or 2x3 format), or sheet film... and you can get them at a fairly reasonable price. And, if you get a Speed Graphic (with a focal plane shutter) you can use barrel lens (che

-- Charles Kleesattel (kleesattelc@mason.k12.oh.us), February 18, 1999.