Rental Cameras: The Project

Medium Format Lens; Canon 30D, Canon 200mm f/2.8L, Canon 430EX + LumiQuest SB-III, LumoPro LP120

While I love my Zeiss Ikon Nettar and Yashica D cameras, recently I've been wishing for a more versatile medium format camera. Specifically, I wanted the following things:

1. The ability to use focal lengths besides "normal" (the Nettar is 75mm, the Yashica 80mm).


2. SLR viewing and close up ability for portraits and food photography (the Nettar is focus guessing, the Yashica has a real focusing, but neither focuses close).


3. A versatile medium format "travel kit" (both my current cameras are actually good travel cameras).


4. 6x6 or larger. I know 6x4.5 is a good percentage larger than 35mm, but honestly, I'd rather not bother carrying a medium format camera for just 6x4.5.

In the medium format world, though, having both #2 and #3 is tricky; the more versatile SLRs are the larger/heavier cameras, which tend to be the ones you don't want to travel with. With that in mind, and with the many options available in MF, I decided I needed to make a list of candidates, and try and rent as many as I could to make an informed comparison and choice. It's possible to read forever about how some people can handhold a certain camera, or carry it around all day, and others would never do that; what matters is whether you can or want to do it, and for that, you need personal experience.

Without further ado, the candidates:

1. Mamiya RZ67. Widely known as an excellent "studio/tripod" camera, with good close focus ability on every lens because of the built in bellows. The rotating back also makes it possible to reasonably shoot 6x7 while using a waist-level viewfinder. Very popular landscape, portrait, product, food camera, which is why it made my list. The downsides are the size and weight.


2. Hasselblad 500 series/Bronica SQ series. These 6x6 SLRs are smaller and lighter than the RZ67, but lack the close focus ability except on a few lenses (or by adding extension tubes/close up filters). The two systems have been compared a lot, mainly because the Bronica is much cheaper used. In terms of rental, however, none of the shops in my city rent the Bronica, and so the Hasselblad will be the representative 6x6 SLR in my comparison.


3. Mamiya 7/Mamiya 6. These rangefinder systems (7 = 6x7, 6 = 6x6) offer fewer lenses than the SLR systems, with better wide-angles, but fewer telephoto options (150mm is the longest). The huge advantage is that with no mirror assembly, they're much smaller and lighter, making them excellent travel cameras. In terms of portrait/food cameras, however, these will be vastly inferior to the SLRs. Again, none of the shops in my city rent the 6 (it's an older camera), and so the 7 will be the representative interchangeable lens rangefinder.


4. Fuji GW/GSW 670/690. These are fixed lens rangefinders, with either a 90mm (GW) or 65mm (GSW) lens, and a 6x7 (670) or 6x9 (format). These have the same advantages and disadvantages as the Mamiya rangefinders, but are cheaper, and can have a larger negative with the 6x9 option. I plan to try the GSW690, as despite being a fixed lens camera, it's not a normal length lens.

From the above choices, an optimal system could be the RZ67 for food, portrait, and some landscape work, plus a rangefinder (Mamiya 6, 7, or Fuji GSW690) as a travel camera. A compromise system would be a 6x6 SLR with a few lenses, that could function well for studio-style work, but be light enough to travel with (probably with only 2 lenses).

In the following weeks, I'll be renting the list above, and posting about my experiences with each system, followed by a conclusion when I decide what's right for me. Hopefully this can help other people who are making the same sort of decision that I am.

Here are the posts so far:

• Mamiya RZ67: Part 1 Part 2
  
• Hasselblad 503C/W: Part 1, Part 2
  
• Fuji GW670III & GSW690III: Part 1, Part 2
  
• Toyo 45AII
  

Olympus 35RC

35RC & Fence; Canon 30D, Sigma 10-20mm, Canon 430EX

For my next camera profile, I thought I should talk about the camera that got me into film photography in the first place, the Olympus 35RC. I initially considered film when I was looking for a very pocketable camera to complement my DSLR. All the digital options sacrificed too much quality compared to my DSLR set up that I felt that I wouldn't have been happy with them. However, there were many compact cameras made that used 35mm film, and having seen many nice black and white film shots, I decided to investigate this option some more.

My first stop was the excellent Cameraquest page on compact 35mm rangefinders. Many of these caught my eye (and some still do, such as an Olympus RD or a Canonet QL17), but the one that stood out was the Olympus 35RC, for reasons I'll discuss below. Luckily, KEH at the time had one in decent condition for a good price, so I didn't have to hunt on eBay.

35RC Outside 1; Canon 30D, Canon 200mm f/2.8L

Unlike previous profiles on this site, I won't list all the stats of the 35RC. Instead, here are several good reference pages/reviews:

• Cameraquest


• Matt Denton


• Andrew Yue

35RC Outside 2; Canon 30D, Canon 200mm f/2.8L, Canon 430EX

Now, my impressions. First the positives:

1. The lens. Very compact 5 element Olympus lens, very very sharp, even wide open, and great when stopped down.


2. The size. This was the inital attraction for me. The camera easily fits in a jacket pocket, or can be carried with one hand.


3. The features. Full manual control as well as shutter priority AE with a meter; bulb shutter speed; hot shoe, and many more (see the pages above for a full list). Despite the wonderfully small size, it offers basically all the features I want in a camera.

And the negatives:

1. The lens. Despite the positives above, there are two negatives. First, it's only f/2.8, so it's not the best low light camera, although some 3200 speed film helps (but see below). Second, the minimum focus distance is not wonderful (3'), although this is a common flaw in this class of camera (the Olympus XA4 focuses down to 1', but it's scale focusing).


2. The meter. It was designed for mercury batteries, and the max speed is only 800, so if you want to use film faster than that you'll need to carry a external meter (or guess).


3. The size. More specifically, the size of the controls. It's very hard to adjust the aperture ring, especially if you have larger fingers.

35RC Outside 3; Canon 30D, Canon 200mm f/2.8L, Canon 430EX

With all that out of the way, let me say this: I love this camera. It's my go-to film camera, great for taking out with friends, or taking out for street shooting, and it would be a great travel camera too. I'm very glad I got it, and will hopefully never get rid of it, just complement it with a faster-lensed but larger camera.

35RC & Luna Pro F; Canon 30D, Canon 200mm f/2.8L, Canon 430EX

Since I'd already taken the traditional "camera on white" shots of the 35RC when I first bought it, I decided to take some different shots of it for this post. All except the black and white were taken with flash, and I realized again how harsh hard flash is on old cameras; I wished I had some kind of portable diffusion solution.

Overlapping Frame Cyanotypes

Chicago Campus 1 Cyanotype (Overlapping Frames); Zeiss Ikon Nettar 518/16, Ilford HP5+, Cyanotype on Cranes Kid Finish

My final plan for the overlapping frame images was to print them as cyanotypes. I felt that the two processes would meld very well; both are analog, not exact, and the wide overlapping frame images would contact print very nicely. I printed the two Chicago images this week, and was very pleased to see that I was right. Both cyanotypes look great, and I think there's a lot of potential here. At some point soon I'll probably set up an Etsy store, and start selling prints of these two on some nicer 5x7 paper. I'm also tentatively thinking about doing a larger series in this style, perhaps 5 images or so. I have a few ideas for the subject, but for now I'm very happy with these two.

Digital negative experiments are ongoing, but so far not great.

Chicago Campus 2 Cyanotype (Overlapping Frames); Zeiss Ikon Nettar 518/16, Ilford HP5+, Cyanotype on Cranes Kid Finish

Overlapping Frames In Chicago

Chicago Campus 1 (Overlapping Frames); Zeiss Ikon Nettar 518/16, Ilford HP5+

I continued my experiments with overlapping frames on 120 film in Chicago, and here are some of the scanned results; these demonstrate another of the frame overlap techniques from my list in my first post on the subject. The first two are using the second method, with 3 overlapping frames.

Chicago Campus 2 (Overlapping Frames); Zeiss Ikon Nettar 518/16, Ilford HP5+

As you can see from these scans, this method of overlapping the frames really gives a wide image. Additionally, while there are two join points, with careful placement of the joins, small errors in the overlap lend character to the image rather than looking like errors. For example, the building in the first image looks like a somewhat crooked building, making the image slightly whimsical; in the second image, the two turrets from the two images just look like two turrets on the chapel.

Bond Chapel (Overlapping Frames); Zeiss Ikon Nettar 518/16, Ilford HP5+

This final image is another example of the first technique, but with a twist applied. I wanted to see if the overlapping technique would be helped by handholding two long exposures. My conclusion is that no, it is not. The movement does not mask the overlap in any appreciable way, and while it does look a little like a ghost movie, that wasn't the effect I wanted. My next plan is to try purposefully having the images out of focus, which will hopefully impart a dreamier look.

For now though, I'm very happy with the first two images here, and will be printing them as cyanotypes (the original purpose of this exercise); scans of those coming soon!