LF or MF?

[Larry Kalajainen]

I have recently acquired a Mamiya 7 with a couple of lenses. Been wanting one for a long time to be my travel outfit.

However, given the cost, I have to sell some existing equipment. I'm both a MF and an LF (4X5) user and enjoy both.

Given the present apocalyptic climate with regard to film and silver-based photography, does anyone have a crystal ball with which to predict which of my equipment (Rollei SL66 or Wista SW outfits) is most likely to remain useful the longest? Which will bite the dust first--roll film or sheet film? I love them all, but something has to go.

Larry

[Ash]

Neither format will disappear, it will only become increasingly expensive to use

[alec4444]

...does anyone have a crystal ball with which to predict which of my equipment (Rollei SL66 or Wista SW outfits) is most likely to remain useful the longest? Which will bite the dust first--roll film or sheet film?

Hey Larry,

Nobody here (including you) will live long enough to find out. Per your dilemma...perhaps there's some old furniture you can sell instead? Car? :D

I have the Rollei 6008 System and I love it. It's heavy, though, for MF and I always wondered if the SL66 system wouldn't have been better. I'd hang onto that if I were you...I haven't seen a lot of them for sale.

--A

[Gary Smith]

Neither format will disappear, it will only become increasingly expensive to use


Agreed. Neither format will vanish and costs will rise, they will survive.

Gary

[Ron Marshall]

I agree, neither will dissapear, but both will be more expensive to use.

[Brian Ellis]

Medium format film will go first I think (though who knows when that will be). It was always much more of a pro format than others, and with no real reason to use it instead of a good digital SLR I don't see much of a future for it. Large format probably has enough serious amateurs to survive longer, though with fewer choices and more cost, because it's a very different kind of photography than any other and has its own unique pleasures not shared by any other format (unlike medium format). Just my opinions of course.

[Michael Graves]

I love my Mamiya 7, too. But I still won't get rid of my 4x5, my 5x7 or my 8x10. I'll just sell my wife's jewelry to pay for film. Heck, I'm still hanging onto my old Kowa Super 66 outfit because I like the square format.

[Rob_5419]

However, given the cost, I have to sell some existing equipment. I'm both a MF and an LF (4X5) user and enjoy both.

Sounds like medium format might be a better option if cost considerations matter.

Might be a hard call, but which format do you use most? I use medium format more than large format, although I like large format more than medium format. If I had your difficult decision to make, I would probably go back to medium format and get a plate camera which costs a fraction of your Wista.

Medium format is cheap enough to continue and a plate camera (costing less than $100 can produce superb whole contact-plates with LF images equal to the Wista images you have. Have a look at your finances and see if you can afford a MF + Plate camera instead of a MF + Wista.

Funny enough! That's what I'm doing - goodbye 10x8" and hello half-plate/whole-plate camera. It's a cheaper option since it doesn't require a 10x8" enlarger which I can't carry at my age...large format doesn't mean large format expenses always....once you have the camera+lens+holder, all you need is film from Efke, Fuji or Ilford, and a cheap 35mm enlarger with a contact printing block and off you go....
whole plate/films have only been available for about 100 years +.


That's my recommendation for anyone who doesn't want the huge expenses of LF photography but traditional LF all the same ;)

[GPS]

Most of the new film cameras are MF cameras! What is more, RF backs are used in many of the new film LF cameras too...

[ronald lamarsh]

I have absolutely no trouble purchasing film at a reasonable cost for both my Lf and MF gear. Paper is the same for me. I do most of my shopping at Freestyle and gave up on kodak a long time ago. Its not their fault they are a huge mutli-national corporation and as such cannot cater to a "niche market" There have always been folks willing to fill the gap i.e Foma, Fotokemika etc. So I use their products......its neither angst nor protest that I do so: its what I do to keep going.
My own personal opinion is that digital will never fully replace film just photography never replaced painting. Many professionals must convert to digital to keep up with the market. Its biggest asset is time and material savings but is it better? Is it inferior? That depends on the viewer......I can't tell you why in quantitative(resolution,tonal scale etc) terms why I prefer silver I just do.
As Hamlet said," Tis niether good nor bad but THINKING makes it so"

[Jack Flesher]

Nothing really new to add to the discussion except what I did when in that position myself... I kept the 4x5 and first sold my 645 MF system, then shortly thereafter sold the Mamiya 7. My reasons were pretty simple: The Mamiya had no movements, and I could get equivalent image quality in a 12 MP DSLR with a per-shot cost that was significantly less AND a system that was even easier to travel with.

But I did love using the Mamiya... Instead, I now have an extra 4x5 that is a lot of fun to use, so don't really feel I lost anything from the Mamiya sale. Worked for me, but respect YMMV...

Cheers,

[Gordon Moat]

Hello Jack,

Was it this type of comparison that made you get rid of your Mamiya 7:

http://www.diax.nl/pages/start_mamiya_nikon_uk.html

Of course an ICG drum scanner costs way more than a D2X, so no savings there.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio (http://www.allgstudio.com)

[Jack Flesher]

Hello Jack,

Was it this type of comparison that made you get rid of your Mamiya 7:

http://www.diax.nl/pages/start_mamiya_nikon_uk.html
A G Studio (http://www.allgstudio.com)


Hi Gordon:

No, it was actually my own testing that led me to that conclusion. As for cost comparisons, I only compared film and processing costs of 120 rollfilm from my local lab, and it was not very many rolls before a Canon 5D body could be bought and paid for in full... Factoring in a drum scan every so often would only add to the DSLR advantage, and factoring in the used values of the M7 and lenses more than covered the cost of a prime set of Canon glass.

As for raw image quality, I would agree with the author's assesment in the above article; that for up to 16x24 or so, the 12MP DSLR has the edge, and after that the 6x7 film will have a slight edge on detail, though the digital file remains better on noise (grain). HOWEVER, at those print sizes, 4x5 will be vastly superior to either, and in my case the option I would prefer to be using for such large prints anyway.

Cheers,

[Larry Kalajainen]

What apocalyptic climate? I just recently (a year) started in LF and now MF. I've had no trouble whatsoever finding film/papers/chemicals or camera and darkroom equipment for either format. Are we living on the same planet? http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gifSeriously. Actually my demands on the system are quite meager, as compared to some folks.

If you're just starting out in MF and LF, then I can understand why you don't yet glimpse the apocalypse. But I've been at this for nearly forty years, and I've seen my favorite papers disappear one by one. Not film--that's still available. I've always been an FP4+ and HP5+ fan until the Deltas came out, and now I use Delta 400 and Fuji ACROS quite happily. But the papers! First, there was the old Oriental Seagull (the new one is nothing at all like it), then Agfa's Portriga Rapid, then Kodak G, then---well, I guess the latest blow was the most hurtful--the loss of Agfa MCC Classic. Best paper I ever used, and I've tried most of 'em. Now even Forte is gone, and that was a close second to the Agfa in my repertoire.

I have no doubt that in the not-too-distant future, my wet darkroom will go the way of all flesh, and I'll start scanning my negs and using an Epson 3800 or some such to make gorgeous prints. That's OK, I guess. Time and technology do roll on. But I will stick to film rather than starting with a digital image just because the technology is rolling on so fast there's no guarantee that even ten years from now I'll be able to access any digitalized image I have now.

I think I may hold both MF and LF for awhile before making a decision. I like the suggestion about selling my wife's jewelry, since I bought most of it anyway. She'll never miss it. . . right?

Larry

[walter23]

There are lots of people in my immediate circle who've started shooting MF as an extension of the photography they learned mainly through digital. Obviously Holga users, but also Bronica, Mamiya, TLRs, etc. Hell, I've got 3 medium format cameras now (2x TLR and 1 645 rangefinder) and I only got seriously interested in photography about three years ago.

At my local store there's still tons of film available. I don't think it's going to disappear anytime too soon.

[Sergio Caetano]

alec said all.
Both (roll and sheet film) will last for a time greater than our lives.

[Alan Davenport]

...does anyone have a crystal ball with which to predict which of my equipment (Rollei SL66 or Wista SW outfits) is most likely to remain useful the longest? Which will bite the dust first--roll film or sheet film?

An interesting, and valid, question. I'll approach the problem from a slightly different perspective than most:

At the present time, digital cameras (as least those most of us can afford) have not yet eclipsed either medium or large format film, therefore both of your film outfits are still a good bet. However, it seems reasonable to conclude that affordable digital cameras will exceed the performance of medium format film, before they beat large format.

Therefore, assuming the continued availability of film, your LF gear will outlive the MF stuff in terms of having something to offer, which you can't get elsewhere.

[GPS]

I have recently acquired a Mamiya 7 with a couple of lenses. Been wanting one for a long time to be my travel outfit.

However, given the cost, I have to sell some existing equipment. I'm both a MF and an LF (4X5) user and enjoy both.

Given the present apocalyptic climate with regard to film and silver-based photography, does anyone have a crystal ball with which to predict which of my equipment (Rollei SL66 or Wista SW outfits) is most likely to remain useful the longest? Which will bite the dust first--roll film or sheet film? I love them all, but something has to go.

Larry

As you have written the post, you have already made you choice in the very recent moment when you acquired you MF outfit - "However, given the cost, I have to sell some existing equipment".
Also, why do you ask the others to know, "which of your equipment is most likely to remain useful the longest"? Most useful to whom? To the humanity? To the manufacturing industry? To your fellow photographers? To me? Or - heavens forbid, to yourself? How does that usefulness depend on the others? It depends on your type of photography, your personal needs and your taste, not on a crystal ball!
If someone tells you - the MF is not as useful to you as the LF - you will just hurry and sell the outfit you just recently bought? Your local photo dealer must be pleased with you...:) If someone tells you that the MF will be obsolete first just look at the most newly produced film cameras - the are just the MF...:)

[Scott-S]

Film will never go, so don't worry. there will always be somebody producing it if there is demand..

[MJSfoto1956]

Most of the new film cameras are MF cameras! What is more, RF backs are used in many of the new film LF cameras too...

Agreed. Also, around the world, most serious amateurs can't afford serious digital equipment and are sticking with film -- particularly medium format. I doubt either format is going away anytime soon.

However, this weekend I went to place an order for Kodak Portra 400NC 220 and found that it was hideously more expensive than just a few months ago. So I'm switching to Fuji 400h -- just bought 20 rolls from Adorama. Bad for Kodak, but I have to vote with my wallet.

I expect film costs will continue to rise from now until eternity. Just means we will have to take fewer but better photographs! ;)

[GPS]

Makes me happy we can also agree on something! Cheers!

[Larry Kalajainen]

I enjoyed all the discussions and contributions. Part of my question was serious; I really do need to sell something. But part of it was just to stimulate conversation around a subject dear to all of our silver halide hearts: whether we're dinosaurs waiting for the asteroid to hit or whether we've got a fair shot at survival.

I probably will sell the Wista outfit eventually, not because I don't enjoy shooting 4X5, but because I find myself shooting 6X6 (Rolleil SL66) and 6X7 (Mamiya 7 and Fuji 670) and 645 (Fuji GS645 and GA645Zi) much more than I shoot with the Wista. I've decided that I'm really a medium format kind of guy, though my bent for contemplation finds its outlet in the 4X5. Also, I'm congenitally lazy and the MF lends itself to easier shooting. If I were doing a lot of architectural stuff (which I'm not), that would be a different matter.

It's not a matter of print quality for me. I rarely print larger than 16X20, and most often stick to 8X10 and 11X14 (why don't we use the 9X12 and 12X15 European sizes? They're much more satisfying!). And quite frankly, I have a very difficult time telling the difference between formats at those sizes. Except with the 645, I get a little grainier skies than I do with 6X7 and 4X5.

Anyway, thanks to all for joining in the fun.

Larry

P.S. And if anyone's interested in a Wista SW (the DX II with interchangeable bellows and reflex viewfinder attachment) in beautiful rosewood and a couple of lenses (180 and 90) let me know.