Want to try MF. Which camera to go for?

gunnar

Suspended / Banned
Messages
577
Name
Alex
Edit My Images
Yes
So if I wanted to try out medium format photography, what camera would be a good compromise for a complete film novice?

I'm not after some crazy resolution, I find resolution on my FF digital is quite enough.

What I'm after is
1) fun with a vintage camera
2) that legendary 'MF film look'
3) reasonable mechanical quality
4) reasonable image quality

I find TLRs quite appealing, but there are hundreds of them on ebay costing anything from £20 all the way into thousands.
Most cameras under £100 seem to be knock offs like Weltaflex, Lubitel, etc... How mechanically reliable are they?
Are they worth the money or does make sense to go one level up for Rolleicord or Yashica?

If so, which Rolleicord or Yashica? There are multiple generations/models and it gets very confusing.
 
Last edited:
Hi, a can of worms is what you've opened here
If you fancy a TLR and don't want to spend silly money then have a look at the earlier yashica mat series A D or the mat itself. They are reasonably priced with a good build quality and a fine lens. Rolleicords are going for silly money at the moment, a Vb or Va can be more expensive than a Rolleiflex Automat, which is the camera I have.
Alternatively, have a look at the folding bellows area. A Voigtlander or Zeiss Ikonta are still fairly inexpensive and both have good glass.

Andy
 
All Lubitel 166 U. The first two on Ilford HP5, the last two on Portra 160. FOr the £30-40 you can get them for they're really not bad, but as I said above, I find the focussing to be difficult and so tend to use narrow apertures on more distant subjects. The bottom two are a little soft at the edges for some reason.

1

FILM - My first roll of medium format-11
by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr

2

FILM - My first roll of medium format-10
by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr

3

FILM - Ship Inn
by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr

4

FILM - Georgian style
by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
I asked a similar question recently. There are some useful suggestions here: https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/medium-format-recommendations.647535/

I've got a Lubitel 166 U. It's plastic, but has a glass lens and can produce decent results (I'll post some in a bit). My main issue with it is that I find it quite hard to judge focus.

Just saying:- Something in the back of my mind says they had a problem with quality control in that you got a good one and it was good but a bad one........dunno what model it was as it might have been one of the first ones out in the 60s etc
 
Just saying:- Something in the back of my mind says they had a problem with quality control in that you got a good one and it was good but a bad one........dunno what model it was as it might have been one of the first ones out in the 60s etc

The "Universal" which is the one I have was the last of the 166 range AFAIK (other than the Lomography version, which is essentially the same with a few cosmetic tweaks). I'm not sure about manufacturing quality, but I recall seeing that the earlier models had an issue that made it quite easy to open the back inadvertently.

EDIT: This page has info on the range: http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/russian2.html
 
Last edited:
Minolta Autocord, a very good TLR...
 
If I was starting afresh, wanted to dip my toe in the water and had about £150 to spend, I think I'd still go for a Rolleicord Vb. It speaks volumes that it still gets lots of use even though I have access to other, much more expensive cameras. Just last weekend the Rolleiflex, Hasselblads, Leica and Pentax 67 kits were sat at home, while the little Rollei was out with me around town. It's also remarkable that it was the first MF camera I bought, I've since acquired and sold practically every other type since, and it's still sat there looking down from the shelf at me with it's silvery German eyes....I'm thinking perhaps it's true love? :LOL:

Light, cheap, reliable, solidly built, beautiful to look at and takes great photos. What the heck else could you want?!

(apart from interchangeable lenses, closer focus, easier to use grad filters and polarisers, removable backs, a Rolleiflex badge, a flatter film path, brighter screen...)
 
Just saying:- Something in the back of my mind says they had a problem with quality control in that you got a good one and it was good but a bad one........dunno what model it was as it might have been one of the first ones out in the 60s etc

The "Universal" which is the one I have was the last of the 166 range AFAIK (other than the Lomography version, which is essentially the same with a few cosmetic tweaks). I'm not sure about manufacturing quality, but I recall seeing that the earlier models had an issue that made it quite easy to open the back inadvertently.

EDIT: This page has info on the range: http://www.rolandandcaroline.co.uk/russian2.html

I've got both a 166B and a lubitel 2, and both have been rock solid, apart from the focussing ring on the taking lens falling off as a result of my son pitching it across the room.
Bit of tweaking and a small screwdriver and if anything its better than it was before.

I've had no issue with the backs staying closed, though the B is a bit tougher to close, but its obvious once you've done it.
 
Well, you probably have two initial options: a) Buy a fully working Lubitel 166 for about £20 to £40 and see how you get on with MF, but bear in mind it tends to give acceptable results rather than pin-sharp ones. b) Invest your full budget in a vintage classic, which should give sharp results (thus giving you the full benefit of MF) but may suffer from age-related issues such as sluggish lower shutter speeds due to the grease/oil hardening and gumming things up, a worn mechanical film winding system, pinholes/light leaks in bellows if fitted, lens fungus, etc.

One possible consideration might be to buy a good, fully working, Lubitel 166 and if you like MF, and get on with a TLR type camera, then you can always sell it on when you upgrade to a more expensive classic (after you've fully researched your options, learned what to look for when buying a particular model and found a suitable one at the right price!). For the £20 to £30 you'd probably pay for a fully working Lubitel 166, I can't imaging you'd drop much money on it when you came to sell (providing you look after it!)?

If you'd rather just take the plunge then a Yashica D TLR might be worth thinking about, you should get a nice one in full working order for between £60 and £80. I wouldn't bother with a Yashica A as I don't think they're really in the same league as the D, unless you find a cheap one in full working order and think it suits your requirements? The Yashica 635 is basically an upgraded D with the ability to shoot 35mm film as well (providing the adaptor kit comes with it), but the number of 635s for sale seems to have really dwindled over the last few months, so finding a good one could take a while. Both these cameras are capable of giving good results, particularly when the sun is behind you.

Rollicords are good, but tend to cost more than a Yashica D, and you probably wouldn't notice a big difference between them in image quality. The Yashica Mat/124G are very good, but have a more complicated 'crank wind' film winding system which can go wrong and cost money to repair. All these cameras feature a focusing screen, which should help take the guesswork out of manual focus. Lots of info on Yashica TLRs here, including about ownership: http://www.yashicatlr.com/

Or, you could look at some of the older MF folding cameras, but most of the more affordable ones don't feature a focusing screen or rangefinder facility, so it's a case of setting the focus according to distance and/or using zone focussing and depth of field. We're also talking about a 60 plus year old camera with these, and the issues that may go with something mechanical and optical of that kind of age. So do lots of research, and learn what to look for before considering a camera such as an Ensign Selfix 820, Voigtlander Perkeo, Zeiss Ikonta, etc. Hope this is useful. Best of luck deciding, and I look forward to seeing some photos once you take the plunge! (y)
 
Last edited:
I'm still wanting to scratch an MF itch and have decided that as a complete break from the more usual 35mm types (RF and SLR), I'd like a TLR shooting 2 1/4" square. Since it might get slightly intermittent use, I reckon a straight film path (or as close as possible) would make sense. Budget is "as much as necessary, as little as possible". Wide angle preferred (about the same FoV as a 20-28mm on 35mm?). Ability to take 220 would be nice but not a deal breaker. Suggestions on a postcard!!!
 
I'm still wanting to scratch an MF itch and have decided that as a complete break from the more usual 35mm types (RF and SLR), I'd like a TLR shooting 2 1/4" square. Since it might get slightly intermittent use, I reckon a straight film path (or as close as possible) would make sense. Budget is "as much as necessary, as little as possible". Wide angle preferred (about the same FoV as a 20-28mm on 35mm?). Ability to take 220 would be nice but not a deal breaker. Suggestions on a postcard!!!

Not sure how many TLRs have the straight film path, but I believe the Minolta Autocord does. I have one (as does @skysh4rk ) and it's very nice. Like most TLRs it's got a lens more like a normal focal length though (mine is 75mm f/3.5). AFAIK if you want a wider angle you might have to go to something like a Mamiya C220 or C330 etc, which have inter-changeable lenses (Wikipedia suggests the widest lens is 55mm, so maybe like a 35mm in, er, 35mm terms?). Excellent cameras, buy a small trolley to wheel it about, though (it's heavy).
 
I'm still wanting to scratch an MF itch and have decided that as a complete break from the more usual 35mm types (RF and SLR), I'd like a TLR shooting 2 1/4" square. Since it might get slightly intermittent use, I reckon a straight film path (or as close as possible) would make sense. Budget is "as much as necessary, as little as possible". Wide angle preferred (about the same FoV as a 20-28mm on 35mm?). Ability to take 220 would be nice but not a deal breaker. Suggestions on a postcard!!!

If you do binge use then ignore you should be ok. I load a film then use it up in any camera I know is a bit funny about having it left.

I like the automat because it doesn't have bellows. It's also light. I find it monumentally awkward to use with the waist level viewfinder though. Results seem to be ok even with struggling to use it.
 
Any Zeiss Ikon, Voigtlander, Balda, Franka 120 camera of any age should be fine. I would avoid Agfa as they used a synthetic material for the bellows which has not passed the test of time and also used a strange green grease that sets like concrete eventually. Also, Gauthier shutters (Prontor, Pronto) last better than Compur shutters.
 
Last edited:
Depending on how much you want to spend Lubitel 166 is a good cheap option or if your budget can stretch to a Yashica 124g then I'm sure you you won't be disappointed with either
 
I'm still wanting to scratch an MF itch and have decided that as a complete break from the more usual 35mm types (RF and SLR), I'd like a TLR shooting 2 1/4" square. Since it might get slightly intermittent use, I reckon a straight film path (or as close as possible) would make sense. Budget is "as much as necessary, as little as possible". Wide angle preferred (about the same FoV as a 20-28mm on 35mm?). Ability to take 220 would be nice but not a deal breaker. Suggestions on a postcard!!!

I found a post on RFF mentioning the Mamiyas, plus Rolleiwide and Rolleiflex FW, or various add-on lenses for some optical quality loss. 55mm seems about as wide as it goes. Be prepared for a shock on the Rollei prices, I suspect 4 figures if you can find one. The wide lens for a C220 seems to go for £150 or so, plus the body cost.

I'd suggest as an alternative you might consider a SLR 6*6 camera like the Bronica SQ-A or Hasselblad 500, with a waist level finder. Much more choice of lenses, and much the same principle as the TLR, except you can manage the filtering better.
 
Not a big filter user so that's not a huge consideration but weight is a bit. The idea of a small interchangeable lens system makes sense if the TLR option would be supplementary lenses with a potential 4 figure price tag! I'll have to start scouring the Mifsuds web site since I like to have a fondle before parting with folding and they're relatively local.

Thanks to all for the suggestions.
 
Most cameras under £100 seem to be knock offs like Weltaflex, Lubitel, etc... How mechanically reliable are they?
Are they worth the money or does make sense to go one level up for Rolleicord or Yashica?

A knock off of what? Rolleiflexes?

Weltaflexes and Lubitels aren't any more knock offs than a Yashica would be. In fact, if anything, I would say that Yashica TLRs are more of the "knock off" variety as they more deliberately copy the Rolleiflex formula. I haven't owned a Weltaflex, but I have been looking at them recently, as I quite like the look of three-element lenses and their swirlier rendering characteristics.

At any rate, there are many TLRs that will perform fantastically. I would say condition is more important than brand. I happily own and use a Holga GTLR, Lubitel 166, Minolta Autocord, and Rolleiflex 2.8E and have previously owned a Yashica Mat 124 and Rolleiflex Automat. While some are certainly quirkier than others (e.g., the Holga GTLR), most are capable of good results used within their constraints.

I'm still wanting to scratch an MF itch and have decided that as a complete break from the more usual 35mm types (RF and SLR), I'd like a TLR shooting 2 1/4" square. Since it might get slightly intermittent use, I reckon a straight film path (or as close as possible) would make sense. Budget is "as much as necessary, as little as possible". Wide angle preferred (about the same FoV as a 20-28mm on 35mm?). Ability to take 220 would be nice but not a deal breaker. Suggestions on a postcard!!!


I wouldn't bother worrying about the straight film path. If it were really that big of a deal, Rolleiflex would have addressed this at some point in the last 80 years that they've been making TLRs. Also, as I mentioned in another thread recently, I have shot over 550 rolls of 120 film in the past three years and I think I've seen an issue relating to the film path maybe once or twice. If you are worried about it, I would follow my advice from that other thread:

If I'm really worried about the possibility of kinked film, I either stop down (i.e., for greater depth of focus) on the second frame (which would be the shot affected by any possible kink) after the camera has been sitting for a while or just take an extra shot (i.e., depth of focus bracketing). Both of those options are easier and cheaper than buying another camera for a straight film path. If it were really a huge issue though, Hasselblad, Rolleiflex and the like would have done a lot more to address the issue over the many years they produced cameras.

Note that I specifically mean depth of focus here, which is distinct from depth of field.
 
A knock off of what? Rolleiflexes?

I seemed to recall that the original Lubitel TLR bore something of a resemblance to the Voigtlander Brilliant - a quick internet search appeared to confirm this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubitel

As for the term 'knock off', I've never liked it's use in this sort of context. Years ago, if an item had been 'knocked off' it usually meant that it had been stolen, now it seems to imply that an item has been copied, faked or forged. I know the use of language changes, but in this instance I'd rather it hadn't. I supposed it's a bit like 'bartering' and 'haggling', where people get the meaning of these words confused and use them incorrectly. :confused:
 
Last edited:
I seemed to recall that the original Lubitel TLR bore something of a resemblance to the Voigtlander Brilliant - a quick internet search appeared to confirm this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubitel

I had a Voigtlander Brillant at one time......it was old, battered and bruised but the taking lens was unbelievably sharp, so much so the negs from that camera were the only ones that I,ve ever scanned that didn't need sharpening mask applied.

My two present TLRs, Rolleicord VA and Yashica Mat 124G offer vg results but nothing as sharp as that old Brillant
 
Rolleicord - great camera, i have one an cant see myself selling (unless i got a better version). Mine is the VA and is loads of fun to use, light, well made, simple and great pics when you get it right. This was one i got back today. Even if you don't like it you will be able to sell for same price. Classic camera.

 
I have a very old Voiglander hand me down TLR.. it is rather crude and basic, and the film roller'scored the film!
I also have a Ziess Ikonta wich is loverly! I cant believe these seldom command more than £20 on the bay, but I guess there is risk on the bellows.
Fantastic photo's though, and not much less basic than the Voiglander.
I had a Hassablad 500c for a week on approval, yeas back.. Bloke only wanted £100 or so for it, ISTR with a couple of spare backs, and a couple of lenses! After the novelty and incredulity ad enthusiasm had worn of 'reality' set in, and I gave it back! Yup, brilliant camera, BUT... to all practcal extents and purposes, I was never going to exploit it's excellence, and i the dark room with back-to-back 35mm vs 4.5x4.5 negs of the same shot, I was down to tiny tiny sectional enlargements to 10x8 bfore cold discern any real notable difference between the results from 35mm, and it was a heck of a lot of faff to use compared to a 35mm SLR.
So, the Voiglander is a bit of decoration on the mantlepiece, and the Ikonta very very occassionally gets an outing, just for the fun.. IQ is still way beyond anything I really 'need' ad they do have that 'feel'.
Bronica's and Miyama's, were always touted as the 'seriouse' MF's, but I would sort of lump with the Hassablad, if you are going to get that keen on the format, and the cost for IQ you probably will never exploit or apreciate can start to get eye-waterig.
Lubtel's were always promoted in the mags as the entry to MF and that even the 'crappy' Russia offering would blow most folks notions of how good even 'good' 35mm could be.. over which I am sanguine, even before Lomo took over... but, of what I remember coming out of them, did tend to be pretty impressive for a camera that cost less than most high street instamatics.
Now? Today? Given the Lubitels were never all that wonderful, even the pre-lomo ones, and just how cheap other MF's are, I'd probably not bother. Would seem that Lomo and the Lubitel legend has kept prices well above thier ranking copared to others... ad they were ever such wonderful bits of precission equipment, and all are likely old and well used or neglected... The lubtels only real feature is how como and how cheap they are.
If I didn't have the Ikonta and wanted a MF camera, I think I would keep my eye on ads and lists, and then look up whatever came up in budget, and consider age, reputation and condition of that, rather than work t'other way about shortlisting from specs what might best suit, and 'anything' in the sub £50 bracket that was of half reasonable quality i days of would probably 'do'.
Getting serious; the Bronies and Manya's would probably be the more common and better VFM for a ore elevated spend, as they always were, but heading that far up market, gap between them and Hassablads, whilst still inflated by the premium of the 'blad badge, does still seem shrink by the general deflation of film cam market, and think in for a penny, in for a quid reasoning would have me pondering, whether to find the extra....

If you haven't used a fully manual camera, though, and that's manual everything; manual focus manual exposure, and probably hand held exposure meter, as well as manual wind on, probably without shutter interlock, so you can expose the same frame as many times as you press the shutter button, if you dot wind on between.... they can be rather laborious to use, and TLR's with reverse image view-finders, can be rather strange to use, and take quite a bit of getting used to.... and sub £50 oferings are probably lesser risk starting point. A TLR or reflex with waste level finder ad reverse image composition will be 'strange' and can be off-putting so a view finder camera may be more natural place to start, but, so much variation the way they all work and handle, any negative experience of one or one type needn't mean you wont get on with another, so you may need or even like to buy and try a few, which again, suggests a slightly less 'targeted' approach to cheaper offerings.

Expect to pend a far bit of time playing hunt the button, knob or dial! I still have games finding the almost 'secret' release catch to ope the Ikota's foldng mechasm, the button cunningly just a bulge i the now slightly bubbly leatherette covering, for example! Control placement can be a bit curouse, often placed where most convenient for the mechanism,rather than the user! You can find things like on the Ikonta the shutter release almost hidden under the lens at the front, and aperture and shutter speeds on dials set where yo cant easily touch them when looking through the view finder.. all part of the 'fun' though... BUT does place added value in cameras that are offered with instructions, and worth checking the web to make sure you can find user manuals whether originals are included wit camera or not, before you buy!
 
Back
Top