From: kbb0@harvey.gte.com (Kevin Burke)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Big Switch: From 35mm to medium format
Date: 22 Jan 93 15:09:30 GMT

In article <21JAN93.19244641.0034@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>, GOCH@UNB.CA (GOCH) writes:
> In article <1jm9hoINNq6j@cronkite.Central.Sun.COM> dbernard@clesun.Central.Sun.COM (Dave Bernard) writes:
> >Has anyone, after years of using 35mm SLRs, been able to
> >succesfully shuck off their old investment, and turn entirely
> >to medium format, and lived happily ever after?  The ease of
> >use, ease of carry, low price of hardware and software (film,
> >processing) make 35mm awfully attractive.  But has anyone turned
> >their back on all that, and been happy with a shift to medium
> >format, which shrugs off some of those attractive features of
> >35mm in exchange for superior image quality?  I'd be interested
> >in hearing your experiences.
> >
> The short answer (for me alone, of course): no.
> I went from 35mm to 4x5 and then added 6x7. For several years I
> stopped using the 35mm completely, since I was doing mostly
> landscape and similar 'straight' photography. But the weight of
> my medium format system (Pentax 6x7) meant that I often did not
> have it with me when I hadn't made special plans. About two years
> ago I happened on a good deal on a Leica M-4 system with 3 lenses
>
> [...more stuff about Leica rangefinders deleted...]
>
> Have I stopped using the medium format cameras? No! They do give better
> quality if   you want fairly large prints. But better quality which
> might have been doesn't look like much on the wall. The Leica encourages
> me to get the image, even when photography cannot be my central
> project.
> Myron

After ten years of multi-format juggling I am converging on a similar
solution, however, it has been driven by the subject matter I approach
most often. For 35mm, I too, use rangefinders alot. For my 35mm
applications I need mobility, spontaneity and speed. While there are
some medium format rangefinders which might suit my needs, I haven't
tried them yet. I have tried various 35mm SLRs as well and liked them,
but I like the range/viewfinder viewing a little bit better. When
ever I put a camera on a tripod it's usually a 2&1/4 or 4x5. My 35mm
lenses tend to be normal, wide, very wide, and short telephoto lenses.
When I'm using a longer focal length outside, I've
usually got the camera on a tripod (once again, it's what I shoot most
that has determined this) so most of my 2&1/4 lenses range from normal
to longish telephoto (by medium format standards anyway ;) ). I also
use the 2&1/4 alot for classical portraiture so these lengths work
there for me as well. When I'm shooting 4x5 I'm usually using a moderate
wide angle so I have ended up with just a few lenses in that range which
satisfy most of my requirements. I typically use significant amounts of
front rise (and sometimes shift and tilt) with my 4x5 so having similar
focal lengths in 2&1/4 (which do not allow the same flexibility) does
not make sense for me.

I have a buddy who has an extensive 35mm SLR system and a minimal 2&1/4
SLR system. He is very meticulous and gets impressive results on
most jobs with the 35mm. When a client demands a larger format he
usually rents what he needs but he's also had some luck getting high
quality 2&1/4 x 3&1/4 dupes made from his 35mm chromes.

I couldn't do most of my work out his camera bag and he couldn't do his
out of mine. I think it ultimately comes down to examining your own
specific needs and preferences.

Regards, Kevin