I seen that one, its an older uncoated 50mm and the 220 back is virtually useless so budget for another back and a normal lenses, also my 50mm C flares at the drop of a hat so I'm not sure how bad the earlier 50mm will be.
220 isn't necessarily useless—
yet. I've picked up over 50 rolls of it over the last year at prices cheaper than most rolls of 120, including nine rolls of Portra 400NC at £1 per roll last month. I've got about 40 rolls at the moment; I save them for times where I need to travel as light as possible or where reloading often just isn't as feasible.
That all said, the selection of films obtainable in 220 is quite limited and it's mostly only colour negative and transparency emulsions that are available.
Good to know, thanks *unwatches*
I've been thinking about format and my only thought for having a 6x6 is that other formats might be tricky for portraits, which I suspect isn't really a good reason to exclude the other sizes
Well, it's the reason that I exclude 6x4.5cm and it is a serious consideration. You're basically limited to using prism finders if you want a vertically-oriented photograph in this format, although some systems, such as the Bronica ETR series, have a rotating prism finder available, which might make things easier.
Obviously the 6x6cm cameras don't require any rotation, which makes them a dream to use on tripods and very easy to use with waist level finders. Many of the 6x6cm SLRs, such as the Bronica SQ series and Hasselblads, will also have the option of 6x4.5cm backs on their 6x6cm cameras as well.
A few of the 6x7 cameras have rotating backs, which will make it easy to shoot in portrait orientation. Many of the 6x7 system cameras will also have 6x4.5cm and 6x6cm backs available too, giving you even more options.
