Medium-Format Camera Tip

I have a small tip for you re medium-format film cameras. My second-ever magazine assignment was to attempt a survey of all the available medium format film cameras, which I did over many reviews. I've used a lot of those cameras over the years.

I also suspect that medium format will be the first style or type of film camera to fade from the scene entirely. Unlike 35mm, there were never lots of them; and they are mostly pretty complex devices, many with some weak point or another; and many of them are most useful with a range of accessories and add-ons, which are not kept together with the cameras and yet are useless without the cameras, meaning they get hard to find. Finally, the experienced repair-people are already aging out.

Why would you use medium-format film cameras? Well, with film, I always used to say, the smaller the camera, the easier it was to use in the field and the harder you had to work in the darkroom, and the larger the camera, the harder it was to work with in the field and the easier and more pleasurable it was in the darkroom. Medium format was either the best of both worlds or the worst of both worlds, depending on whether your glass is half empty or half full.

Folders!
One of the most recent medium format film cameras, and hence among the newest used ones, is the beautiful folder made by Voigtlander (Cosina, headed by the great enthusiast Kobayashi-san). There are two versions, the Voigtlander Bessa III 667 (technically it should be either Voigtländer or Voigtlaender, but people write "Voigtlander") or the Fuji GF670*; it's the same camera but was marketed by both companies. There's a variant with a fixed 55mm wide-angle lens. Either type will be hella expensive in the used market.

But if you want to try that style of camera, a sleeper is the Agfa Super Isolette. It was among the last of a very long line of folding cameras that included many German makes and models. These folders are not ergonomic masterpieces, and take a little getting used to...and they're not fast. But the Super Isolette is still relatively on the cheap side, around a grand, and they can be repaired by Jurgen at Certo6.com, who is the man when it comes to folders.

There's only one gotcha, which is that the film advance can't be repaired by anyone. So always make sure what you buy has the film advance tested by the seller before you buy, and always advance the film gently and deliberately, as if the whole camera depending on its continued smooth functioning, because it does. And you have to be aware that yes, if it ever fails, it will "brick" the camera—the only solution is to find a donor camera and graft in the whole mechanism.

Super Isolettes were made in the mid-1950s and they are just superbly well built. (The film advance is delicate because it's gloriously complicated in the German way and as exquisite as a watch movement. Okay, almost).

I don't think a Super Isolette is necessarily the best or most practical option—it's just a workable substitute for a Bessa III. (Everyone I know who bought a Bessa III never got into using it...they all become shelf queens.) I personally like the Bronica SQ-A (it takes cheaper batteries than the later SQ-Ai). Still cheap-ish, and the system of interlocks saves me from making mistakes. The problem there is the backs, which fail at a pretty high rate. That's according to Helix's rental department in Chicago in the mid-'90s. So get at least two backs.

They are all awkward, kludgy, and lovable
It's unfortunate, but there just is no such thing as an ideal medium-format film camera. The market for the final 30 years was mainly pros, and the Hasselblad was the standard in North America (for all but portrait photographers, who typically used Mamiya RB67s), and the Rolleiflex SLRs were the standard in Europe. They kinda suffocated development of alternatives, although a variety of makers kept trying.

A Pentax 6x7 is also a great option. They go off with a great icky thump, and you just can't believe the flopping mirror doesn't degrade the image with vibration, but it doesn't. Add Tri-X and the results are very nice.

Base advice—when interviewing medium-format candidates, make sure you can focus the darn thing, whatever it is (I cannot focus Rolleiflex TLRs), and figure out how you're going to meter and whether you can live with that. Many cameras had those awful metering prisms as an add-on...studio pros never used in-camera metering and just didn't need it.

If wishes were horses, a frog wouldn't bump his ass so much...wait....
What I always wanted was a square camera (because you don't need to accommodate horizontal and vertical composing), with a waist-level-finder, that had in-body metering. They're out there, but they're all expensive. Currently I own not one but two Rolleiflex 6008AFs, pristine, and one 80mm AF lens which no longer autofocuses. Plus a 45-degree finder and the handgrip, two newly rebuilt batteries, three battery casings (they're what you need to get rebuilt to have a functioning battery, and they are rare), and three chargers including one new one and one old one which has never been opened. I really need to get the lens fixed so I can sell the lot, but...I always have lots on my plate, plus procrastination is a thing.

I have finally come 'round to the conviction that I will never shoot medium format black-and-white film again. This insight has come only after buying, I don't know, half a dozen medium-format cameras that I never used? Three of them are still upstairs (the Rolleis and my Exakta 66).

But for pure photographic beauty, I'll always be loyal to them.

Mike

*[CORRECTION: I'm sorry, my memory failed me as to the name of the Fuji version. I had it as the "667" when that is an alternate name for the Bessa III. I was confused by the naming when they came out and I guess I still am! I apologize for the error. Thanks to Ned B. for pointing it out.]

Book o' the Week

 All About Saul Leiter. The Amazon writeup for this book says "Photography lovers the world over are now embracing Saul Leiter"—and oh boy, is that ever true of me—"who has enjoyed a remarkable revival since fading into relative obscurity in the 1980s." One of my favorite photographers. Beautiful photopoems. Saul's Early Color (which you can still get for around $300) was one of our all-time bestselling book links. (I bought two, one to thumb and one to not touch!)

This book link is a portal to Amazon.

Link to B&H

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Comments

[Jim]

I'm kind of surprised at a few of your comments including the last one. The last cameras I would give up are my Roleiflexes and Hasselblads. The Rolleis and 503CW are completely mechanical so are simple to use and carry around. Film backs are the weakness of the Hassie system. Of course you are absolutely correct that once something goes wrong, you are in trouble because parts are increasing scarce. The other problem is the cost of film and other supplies. 135 is cheaper and more ubiquitous but not as much fun. I think 4x5 is in more trouble.

[John Robison]

For 6x6 I’d recommend a Yashica D or even a Mamiya C22 or 220 with any working 80mm lens. Shucks, even a Yashica A would work. They can be had for $200 which is 3 oil changes on my cheap Nissan. (To put the price into context.) At least with an A model the winding is the dead simple red window film positioning type.

[darlene]

Every portrait and wedding photographer I knew in Atlanta in the late 80s through the 90s shot with Hasselblads. The RB67 (had one briefly, received as barter, gave to an assistant as a gift) was too "heavy." And this comes from a 5'2" petite woman that shot candids at corporate events with a Hasselblad 500 with a 50mm lens, 70mm film back (65-70 frames), Metz/Sunpak light connected to a Quantum battery hanging from her shoulder. My arms always looked like I lifted weights. I did, my Hasselblads or 4x5 and lights, etc. for on-location shoots. LOL

Medium format has always been "my format of choice," but 4x5 is very close to the top and gaining ground with alternative processes. 135 was never a favorite, but it is what got me started and for that reason alone, I am grateful for it. But not enough to keep a Leica. ;)

[Mike Chisholm]

I went through a phase of using folders in the mid-1990s: they were dirt cheap then and came in all sorts of shapes and sizes. I used a Super Isolette II exclusively for a project photographing the Test (a local Hampshire river) that turned out some beautiful prints, which were exhibited in a riverside National Trust property for 6 months. It's a wonderfully compact and robust thing when folded, a true pocket camera.

A point to note about the Super Isolette is that it came with two lenses: the very good 4-element Solinar, and the perfectly OK 3-element Apotar (there was also a bottom of the range Agnar, also 3-elements I think).

I should sell them on now, especially as your mention won't have done the prices any harm...

Mike

[Peter Komar]

Ah yes, I do own the AGFA Super Isolette. A great “folder” for sure, the optics are quite good and the camera just oozes quality and workmanship. I even have the leather case for it but have not used it in a while. Double exposures are possible if that’s your thing. I also do not totally agree with the Pentax 6x7 comment regarding mirror or shutter slap not degrading image sharpness. I also performed a side by side test with film as noted in my “water container” on the ground glass experiment. This was detailed in my previous comment/post when compared to my Hasselblad 500cm. A good debate however, always willing to be proven wrong, no worries.

[Bill Skones]

Nice post. I must confess to having too many old Zeiss Ikon cameras including a pristine Super Ikonta 534/16 (6x6 format.) My favorite is an Ikonta 521A 6x4.5 camera. Compact and light with a very bright view finder ;-). It fits in a jacket pocket. A nice camera if you don’t need the square experience.

[Stephen Scharf]

Just curious, Mike, you ever shot with the Fujifilm GFX50R?

Going to respectfully take exception to your comment that they are all "awkward and kludgy."

The GFX5R about as ideal an medium-format camera as I've ever shot with. And...it's only slightly larger than your Fuji X-H1.

And the image quality is absolutely gorgeous. Especially black and white photos when processed in Capture One Pro.

Just sayin'. ;-)

Cheers.

[Sorry, I was only talking about *film* medium-format. I'll go re-edit to make that more clear. --Mike]

[Bob Rosinsky]

I love the square format. Over the past several years, I've bought, returned and/or sold at least a dozen.

I'm now down to a Hasselblad 500 C/M with an 80mm f/2.8 Planar and a Sonnar 250mm f/5.6. The camera and lenses work well, and the ergonomics are nicer than most medium format kits. And crucially, it's still possible to get the body serviced. I recommend staying away from the silver C lenses (Compur shutters). From what I understand, Hasselblad has stopped servicing them, and it's nearly impossible to replace the spring once the shutter goes.

[Jim Natale]

Different kind of camera but a similar outlook. A few months ago I bought an old Minolta rangefinder at a flea market. Cosmetically flawless, but the shutter is useless. That's okay because I have no intention of shooting flim again. On the mantle, though, it's beautiful. A small well-crafted picture-making machine that's now an objet d'art.

[Kevin Crosado]

I had three MF TLRs.

The lens and back on the Yashica 124G were out of alignment, so you had to choose which half of the image you wanted sharp. Bought on a Friday, returned the following Monday.

The Mamiya 220 was wonderful, but every so often the back would decide not to keep the film completely flat, so you got out of focus spots in an otherwise sharp image. Fugly on a photo of a pebbledash building façade.

The Rollieflex was noticeably less sharp than the C220, but the lens had beautiful tonality. The sports finder was brilliant for panning shots because it made it easy to line up an approaching subject and to keep it properly aligned during the follow-through. Walked all over an SLR if its focal length was what you wanted. I think I've still got the Rollei somewhere – last used last millennium. The Bronica and the Technika were more practical for most things, with the Ikonta folder and Canons for playtime.

[Bob Johnston]

Has no one got the beautiful Minolta Autocord?

[Dan Khong]

I have heard of people who own 35mm cameras and no MF ones. But I have not heard of someone owning a MF camera and not a single 35mm camera.

Using MF is a deliberate choice.

[Kodachromeguy]

The folders you described are really nice. I am surprised at your many readers who categorically state they will never shoot film again. Why? Are some of them still lost in the film versus digital battle?

When I am out with my Hasselblad or Fuji GW690 and I tell people that I am using b&w film, they universally say "That's great." or "That’s the right way to do it."

[Herman Krieger]

With the two Fuji cameras, which I used for many of my black and white photo essays-

[Arne Croell]

Well, my Bessa III is anything but a shelf queen. I bought it in 2009, when it came out, and have used it ever since. The brassing on the transport wheel shows it’s use. Great for travel. I actually bought a used Fuji 670 version as backup in 2015, before used prices went through the roof, in case my main one stops working.

[ashok viswanathan]

Talking of folding cameras brings memories of my first camera kindly lent by my uncle (early 1990)- a Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta IV. it came with a Tessar lens and had a rangefinder/ meter.when my uncle passed away checked on the camera and no one seemed to know where it is or what happened to it. i am looking for one on the used market in excellent condition. great camera to use and carry around. meanwhile i have my Rolleiflex 3.5f Tessar now out of retirement and
CLA'd.

[Lothar Adler]

Referring to Mr. Peter Komar's comment and his water glass experiment on the Pentax 67:
I am absolutely convinced that his observations are correct, especially since a long time ago other people had also performed this test and arrived at the same results.
However, I find it remarkable that this camera was nevertheless used successfully for decades by very many international world-class photographers, not least CTEIN, who as a physicist certainly had an awareness of this issue (mass motion and vibration).
There are a few shutter speeds on this camera that should be avoided if possible, especially 1/15 sec is problematic, even on a tripod and with mirror lockup. Between 1/125 - 1/1000 sec. the world is fine again. With mirror lockup, 1 sec. to ¼ sec. is also good.
The whole thing reminds me of an old joke:
According to aerodynamic calculations, a bumblebee can't fly, but it does anyway because it knows nothing about these calculations.

[Julian]

For me the perfect 6x6 folder is the lovely Mamiya 6, which I know you are also a fan of Mike. I have 2 bodies and all 3 lenses, and it's the perfect travel camera. Small, quiet, versatile. What's not to like? Yes, it's electronic and will brick at some point, but that's why I have 2 of them... :)

[Eric Rose]

To get a better read on what film shooters are using these days I suggest you spend some time lurking on http://photrio.com It's probably the best all film format forum on the net.

You will find that lots of film enthusiasts are still using MF.

Eric

[Dale]

If you have the mirror locked up on a Pentax 67, and you're getting vibration, it's because you are not using a heavy enough tripod AND head. I went from an 055 to an 075, and added a three-way pan-tilt - problem solved.

[Mark H]

I don't understand why the film advance is such an intricate mechanism. All it does is wind the film. It doesn't even stop at the next frame. You have to stop winding by looking at the number through the red window, same as a Brownie or a Holga.