Bye Bye Bronica :(

[Tom Pinchenzo]

So I'm selling my Bronica ETRSi, which was my first foray into medium format. I really loved huge brick of a machine it was but and nothing on 35mm compares to that viewfinder, or the mirror slap that feels like it's slapping you in the face and saying 'YOU JUST EXPOSED SOME FILM AND DON'T FORGET IT!'. But after nearly a year of use I've realised it's not the camera for me. It doesn't suit the kind of photography I was using it for, i.e. mostly family and friends, in particular, my uncooperative 2 year old... I really like getting candid shots (with my daughter that's the only options as there's no posing her) and I found the combination of having to use an external meter combined with the fairly slow manual focusing frustrating: my previous camera was a manual focus Pentax ME super, but I found I could get focus much quicker, due to the split prism, the shorter focus throw, less resistance in the focus ring which meant it could be adjusted faster, but most of all, the psychological effect of knowing that missing focus and ruining a frame is much more costly!

So I've decided 35mm is the format for me, at least for the moment. I've recently bought a Nikon F80, which I'm really enjoying, particularly the autofocus! I think I will return to medium format as there's definitely a pull for me, but maybe in a few years time. I might even jump straight in with 6x7...

Has anyone else had similar experiences with experimenting with different formats??

 

[excalibur2]

Well it's horses for courses;- If you have children (or any other subject) that wont sit still or stay stationary then like me it's more convenient (and less wasted shots) to have an AF camera, and you are limited with the ETRS without the AEII prism and speed grip for fast work.
The viewfinder in the RB67 is amazing and I bought that model in the past for one purpose, with a 180mm lens, and that was for portraiture, but as no one wants to sit for me anymore as everyone can take VG shots with their mobile and don't want to wait to see the results, will start to use it for scenery etc.

 

[steveo_mcg]

has anyone else had similar experiences with experimenting with different format

I mostly shoot 4x5 these days, partly the convenience of not having to finish a roll, but you can pull my RB67 from my cold dead hands.

 

[freecom2]

Has anyone else had similar experiences with experimenting with different formats??

That's the beauty (and the fun) of having access to cameras of different formats that were incredibly expensive when first released, and are now affordable. 110, 35mm, all the iterations of medium format and large format - dabble and find what works for you, and matches your subject. Your subject is fast moving - so you need a fast focusing, auto metering camera!

 

[Tom Pinchenzo]

Well it's horses for courses;- If you have children (or any other subject) that wont sit still or stay stationary then like me it's more convenient (and less wasted shots) to have an AF camera, and you are limited with the ETRS without the AEII prism and speed grip for fast work.
The viewfinder in the RB67 is amazing and I bought that model in the past for one purpose, with a 180mm lens, and that was for portraiture, but as no one wants to sit for me anymore as everyone can take VG shots with their mobile and don't want to wait to see the results, will start to use it for scenery etc.

There’s no comparison between a phone camera and 6x7 film! I’d love to shoot more ‘proper’ portraits but I’m a bit funny about asking to take peoples photos in a more ‘formal’ context. I feel like most people don’t like having their photo taken so it feels awkward to ask. Even my partner!

 

[excalibur2]

There’s no comparison between a phone camera and 6x7 film! I’d love to shoot more ‘proper’ portraits but I’m a bit funny about asking to take peoples photos in a more ‘formal’ context. I feel like most people don’t like having their photo taken so it feels awkward to ask. Even my partner!

Well of course a 6X7 is better but it seems Joe public consider a mobile is good enough most times (well except for weddings etc). My son doesn't use his digi SLR anymore and just use his mobile and many shots of partner and friends.
In the past before digi was invented family and friends were pleased to have their picture taken in my home setup and didn't have any problems asking them and surely you must have taken "everyday" shots using your digi of your partner\family\friends so just ask them to sit for you in your portraiture setup...erm they can only say no
Setting up proper portraiture shots is a great hobby and results are only a good as your setup e.g. indoors you would need a decent back ground and two flash guns (one at half power) if you can light the hair from above or back ground it sometimes helps......plenty of tips on setting everything up on the net.
Out doors is more tricky in sunlight as you don't want your subject squinting so your model would turn away from the sun, but to prevent a shadow on her face would have to use a flash gun and get the balance right with ambient light. Some cameras like the Canon T90 can work out exposure for you (using their model flashgun) all easy peasy...h'mm well you still have to get the shot that would please the subject and I've made mistakes esp on one girl when I should have taken the shot at a higher (or lower can't remember) angle as it accentuated her square jaw
Have fun........

 

[Stephen L]

I sold my Bronica ETRS last year. It gave great results but was temperamental - or was it me? But I still wanted to shoot 120, so I bought a Yashica 124. That’s not really doing it for me either. But now I’m putting film through a Selfix 820 and enjoying it. True, it slows you down to almost glacial pace (I guess for truly glacial I’d have to go 5x4), but it feels so involving.

 

[steveo_mcg]

Must admit, my dslr hasn't been out of its bag in years. My phone is good enough for my casual shots and if I'm shooting for a purpose I'd rather use a film camera.

I do keep looking at the OM-D and others of its ilk but I know its a waste of money.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

It's totally dependant on what you want to shoot combined with what works well for you. We are in a fortunate position that there are many, many film cameras that all work differently. I have now been fortunate enough to own/try many film setups. 35mm either fully manual, rangefinder or SLR up to full AF (Nikon F100, Canon 1V) as well as medium format, from the Contax 645 with it's AF and stunning 80mm F2.0, Hasselblad 500cm which has a lot of the traits you describe with the long focus throw and no meter, Penax 67ii which has a meter but I choose to use a handheld and manual focus but a much shorter throw than the Hasselblad. They are all different but I am now at a place where I really get the cameras I have kept (Leica, 500cm and P67) and know them well enough to shoot many things the way I want to. Part of the fun is finding what works for you whilst getting to try lots of different cameras without actually losing much, if any money at all (my recent sales have actually made me money after owning and using cameras for a few years).

I would say though, don't think that handheld metering has to slow you down much. Combine it with learning about how to read light as well as the latitude of colour negative film and you can dial in settings and shoot.

e.g. indoors you would need a decent back ground and two flash guns (one at half power) if you can light the hair from above or back ground it sometimes helps......plenty of tips on setting everything up on the net.
Out doors is more tricky in sunlight as you don't want your subject squinting so your model would turn away from the sun, but to prevent a shadow on her face would have to use a flash gun and get the balance right with ambient light.

Just to take this paragraph from Brian, none of these things are necessary for taking portraits, either indoors or out. I have shot weddings and portraits on film without flash and get lovely results either indoors or in bright sunlight. There are so many ways to shoot good portraits without this and I follow many people on Instagram who do it way, way better than I can using zero flash.

 

[Tom Pinchenzo]

I follow many people on Instagram who do it way, way better than I can using zero flash.

Any recommendations??

 

[excalibur2]

Just to take this paragraph from Brian, none of these things are necessary for taking portraits, either indoors or out. I have shot weddings and portraits on film without flash and get lovely results either indoors or in bright sunlight. There are so many ways to shoot good portraits without this and I follow many people on Instagram who do it way, way better than I can using zero flash.

...but surely using a home setup or outdoors using a flashgun or reflector it's all about controlling the light that you want...with a home setup you can take shots at night.
From the great shots from Hollywood in the past to pros today they can't be all wrong.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

Any recommendations??

Let me have a scroll through. I only really follow film shooters but I unfollowed quite a few who shoot models as I decided not to do this any more.

https://www.instagram.com/sandyphimester/?hl=en

Produces some beautiful stuff, IMO.

...but surely using a home setup or outdoors using a flashgun or reflector it's all about controlling the light that you want...with a home setup you can take shots at night.
From the great shots from Hollywood in the past to pros today they can't be all wrong.

I didn't say it was wrong, but one of my pet hates in photography is when people say something like it's the only way.

Yes, with flash you can get the exact result you want and I admire it very much when done well and have many books with beautiful portraits from Mcnally and Heisler to name a couple, both indoors and outdoors using flash. But you don't NEED these things.

It's partly the reason I don't post images any more in the forum section. Years ago, I wasn't good at handling the critique which thankfully I have grown out of but now, people critique images like it's a maths question with a right and wrong answer and recite things like it's the only right way. As much as there are many people shooting amazing images with flash, there are just as many doing it without. The problem with quoting things in photography like they are facts is they can potentially kill someones creativity.

 

[Woodsy]

Ultimately, I think your approach is right - as has been said by most above. Your requirements are what ever they are, and so the best thing you can do is experiment until you find a system that best fits them. I, like most on here, have gone through the motions as well. 35mm, 645, 66, 67, 5x4, etc - they all have their place and attributes, so definitely fiddle around with as much as you can.

Personally I've landed on 5x4 for landscapes. This works perfectly for me, and even though I feel the pull of 10x8, I doubt I'll ever actually take the plunge as the benfits also incur hightened drawbacks. For shooting waves, I've gone from a Mamiya 645 to an F5, and then decided that 35mm just doesn't get me excited. Though the lack of AF will be a pain, I've now decided to trial the RB67 with long lenses and just suffer the reduced rate of shooting. Dare I say it, I've even trialed using digital during one trip and it's hard to deny the ease and advantages that it brings.

Out of interest... Where are you planning on selling the ETRSi?

 

[joxby]

The trouble with MF is if its not an RF its going to be a big awkward box.
I've been through my fair share of big awkward boxes and have kept only one, through which I put maybe a roll a year through at night.
I figure if I have to cart a tripod about I might as well cart the big awkward box too.
You can't really escape the convenience and flexibility of 35mm even against a 120 RF, but you're always going to be accepting a compromise one way or the other whichever you shoot.
Personally, I like bigger negs so 35mm is off the menu, but over time I realized I didn't want to faff about with a big awkward box either so the compromise is to accept the limitations of an RF and keep the big negs, portability and ergonomics..

 

[excalibur2]

Let me have a scroll through. I only really follow film shooters but I unfollowed quite a few who shoot models as I decided not to do this any more.

https://www.instagram.com/sandyphimester/?hl=en

Produces some beautiful stuff, IMO.



I didn't say it was wrong, but one of my pet hates in photography is when people say something like it's the only way.

Yes, with flash you can get the exact result you want and I admire it very much when done well and have many books with beautiful portraits from Mcnally and Heisler to name a couple, both indoors and outdoors using flash. But you don't NEED these things.

It's partly the reason I don't post images any more in the forum section. Years ago, I wasn't good at handling the critique which thankfully I have grown out of but now, people critique images like it's a maths question with a right and wrong answer and recite things like it's the only right way. As much as there are many people shooting amazing images with flash, there are just as many doing it without. The problem with quoting things in photography like they are facts is they can potentially kill someones creativity.

Indeed VG shots from the link and I have taken many similar shots without flash, but IMO you need oppurtunity and maybe more planning and are stuck with trade off with film ISO, DOF and shutter speed. The advantage with a setup is you can take many VG shots of different persons and only need to adjust the height of the lighting or whatever and with plenty of light can even use 100 ISO film.....OK they maybe look boring with the same setup as a collection but the individual shot taken of a person....he\she wouldn't know.
Once you get experience with a home setup and flash you can then go to full body or group shots like this:-

RB67, 65mm lens and two semi pro flashguns taken about 35 years ago, probably my favourite film at the time Vericolor 160 ISO

 

[Woodsy]

Those hairstyles though...

 

[FishyFish]

I bought my ETRSi last year. I don't use it as much as I thought I would, but it does get used (it has a roll of Fomapan 100 in it as I type).

I bought it because I wanted a medium format camera that didn't shoot 6x6 as I already had a Yashica Mat and a Zeiss folder (and since then, the Holga!), but didn't want to spend (or just couldn't afford!) the price of a decent 6x7. Although the ETRSi is much smaller than something like an RB67, it's still much bulkier than a 35mm camera, or even a MF rangefinder, so it's not something I tend to take out without planning. Similarly, because of the mirror-slap, I've found that I need to be shooting at higher shutter speeds handheld, and even if using a tripod, will use mirror-lock-up where possible.

Mine came with the speed-grip and metered prism finder, so it's possible (within limitations of weight, bulk, and the aforementioned shutter speed considerations) to shoot it as a standard SLR, but I much prefer taking it our with the waist-level finder and winding-crank as it becomes considerably less cumbersome (if less useful for portrait-orientation shots). It took quite some time to locate a WLF and crank at a sensible price though.

The long focus throw is a bit of a PITA, I agree. I've also found it quite difficult to nail focus if I shoot the 75mm f/2.8 wide open - even using a split prism.

Shooting medium format for me is something that is more considered, so I tend to use it on occasions where I know I'll have time to properly set-up and compose shots. For anything faster paced, I'll just use 35mm. Maybe I just need more practice though.

 

[excalibur2]

Those hairstyles though...

My sister in law (far left) wouldn't look at the camera after several shots and think it was because (unknown to me at the time) she was suffering from cancer and sadly eventually died.

 

[Deleted member 21335]

Indeed VG shots from the link and I have taken many similar shots without flash, but IMO you need oppurtunity and maybe more planning and are stuck with trade off with film ISO, DOF and shutter speed. The advantage with a setup is you can take many VG shots of different persons and only need to adjust the height of the lighting or whatever and with plenty of light can even use 100 ISO film.....OK they maybe look boring with the same setup as a collection but the individual shot taken of a person....he\she wouldn't know.
Once you get experience with a home setup and flash you can then go to full body or group shots like this:-

RB67, 65mm lens and two semi pro flashguns taken about 35 years ago, probably my favourite film at the time Vericolor 160 ISO

Brian, make it clear, I am not disputing the use of flash for photography. I’m saying it’s not the only way to take portraits like you implied in your original response to Tom. I’d love to see your similar shots to the ones I linked to BTW. When you say, ‘they maybe look boring’, though. I have no words.

In fact, I’m out of this discussion now.

 

[excalibur2]

****they maybe look boring******

Well if anyone else is interested in what I mean as boring with a flash setup:- If you use the same setup for frontal portraiture I found you can get umpteen excellent record shots of different people and individually the persons you have shot are pleased erm but not very creative. So the fun begins in trying to be creative and move the flash guns and person around e.g. if a girl has lovely eyes shoot them at closeup etc.