BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: To Be Categorized

35mm vs. Medium Format

Two questions:
Is this a reasonable price for this system?

Should I stick to my 35mm for a little while? I honestly haven't mastered all the bells and whistles and I enjoy my pictures which are usually travel, landscapes, and people. It's the people portion that has me thinking of going to the MF because of the increased quality but I have a considerable investment in my 35mm equipment (N90s, F100, SB28, 80-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 24mm-120mm 3.5, 90mm 2.8 micro assorted filters).

Money isn't the problem. I have this nagging voice that keeps saying stay with the 35mm until you master it. What do you think?

To love this question, log in above
June 04, 2000

To love this comment, log in above
August 29, 2000

First, I cannot speak for the pricing. Check KEH Camera Brokers as a benchmark. Their pricing runs average to slightly above average, but their grading is very, very conservative, and reputation impeccable. You can also search eBay closed auctions for closing prices, but there is considerably more variability there so take what you find there with guarded skepticism.

If you have not used MF before, the fundamental principles of composition, exposure and DOF control are identical. In terms of frame, the aspect ratio of 35mm is 2:3 and the aspect ratio of 645 is 3:4, making a 645 frame either slightly less wide, or slightly taller, depending on how you look at it. However it is not nearly the huge shock going to a 6x6 square frame is!

I disagree with Chuck that 645 is close to 35mm. It uses the same width as 2-1/4 (6cm x 6cm) and is 3/4 as tall (4.5cm). This means it is about 3 times the size of a 35mm frame versus 4 times the size for 6x6. Furthermore, the 645 frame aspect ratio is very close to larger print sizes, most especially 8x10 and 16x20 meaning very, very little cropping in the print. It is much closer than 35mm.

The first difference you will encounter is no 120 or 220 consumer film; it is all professional films from the big three: Kodak, Fuji and Agfa. Also quite different are the size, weight, and handling of film loading and unloading. You will find your work in MF much more deliberate and you will not be able to shoot quick action (sports, etc.) or Cartier-Bresson style candids easily, even with a motor drive. It is too big and too heavy for that, and hand held MF works for short periods, not continuously all day. A tripod is recommended whenever possible. This was the greatest adjustment for me, but there was a side benefit. As my shooting slowed down, more thinking, discipline and deliberateness went into each shot, and this has carried over into my 35mm shooting improving it greatly.

What you will get, for portraits, landscape and architectural is considerably more resolution with the larger negative or transparency. This means much greater enlargement to 16x20 and bigger with incredible sharpness not possible with the size of a 35mm frame. It shows for me starting with carefully done 5x7 prints. In 4x5 or 4x6 print you will see little, if any due to the small print size.

If you find the price within reason, then try it for a while, and if you decide it's not for you, then you can resell the equipment and get your money back out. I'm glad I've got my MF hardware. I use the M645 for some types of photography now, and the 35mm system is regularly used for other types of photography. The two can complement each other.

To love this comment, log in above
August 29, 2000

The skills and techniques for 35mm photography are basically the same for taking pictures in medium format. The main reason for using a medium format over 35mm is essentially to get bigger enlargements with sharper resolution. Because the medium format in 6cm x 6cm is about 350 percent larger in size than the 35mm format, making enlargements with the medium format will certainly yield sharper pictures since you are working with a much larger negative to begin with.
Unless you are making enlargements beyond 5 X 7 on a regular basis, you may not really see that much of a difference between the 35mm and medium format. With the introduction of new films within the 35mm format such as Kodak Professional Supra 100, sharper enlargements within the 35mm format have improved. But if your desire is to make enlargements to 11 X 14 or larger and want more detail, then the medium format is preferred. In going with a medium format, one must also consider the fact that the medium format film is about 40 percent more expensive than 35mm and the cost of developing is generally a bit more expensive than 35mm film.

If you like the advantages of the medium format and money is not a big issue, then I would recommend going with a Hasselblad 203FE. This camera is very easy to use and has aperture priority mode as well as a program automatic mode. Since you are already familiar with using the Nikon system, the 203FE would be a smooth transition for you to the medium format. Cameras in the medium format are generally larger and heavier than 35mm cameras, so you would want to use a tripod as often as possible to achieve maximum sharpness.

Sincerely,
Dale

To love this comment, log in above
August 30, 2000