Question on Medium Format

CarnalSigh

I am thinking of purchasing a medium format digital camera for some nude fine art experimentation. However, I am running into a roadblock information-wise concerning medium format digital cameras. My main question regards the use of the term *back*.

As far as I can tell, if you purchase something like a Hasselblad H3D, you have to buy a camera....as well as a back. I bought a book on photography, and the author mentions backs several times, but never explains in layman's beginner terms what the heck the deal is with them.

What is a camera....and what is a back? Do you buy a camera that u keep forever, and simply change backs if you want to do something different? Can anyone help me out here? I just don't want to buy a camera for $35,000 only to find out I need a front or a back to use with it.

David_S85

Simply put, the pro variety of medium format (and large format) cameras employ a 2-piece architecture. Front part is body+lens. The back, which is detatchable, holds the imaging portion; be it film/spindles, windings or drive -- OR -- the digital sensor, power, card(s), output fittings and other electronic gizmos. The original reason for this is for the photographer to replace the film magazine (the back) once full (with large format the magazine was just one sheet). An example of usage in medium format would be fashion photography where an assistant would take away the exposed section of the camera (the back) for development whilehanding the shooter a fresh new back with unexposed film pre-loaded so he/she could keep shooting away. Or... one could switch to a B&W filled back. Or, a different speed film, or... you get the point.

As the bodies and lenses on these puppies are many thousands of dollars, or even tens of thousands, it makes sense to have a few film backs handy; loaded for an uninterrupted session (that, or other cameras ).

In digital, a back has the sensor, and other electronics within. Many pros will use the same medium body/lens with a digital or a film back, whichever they feel suited to the job. Digital backs are way more expensive, and as I understand are up to about 39MPixels now. Since digital uses either a tethered cable to a computer (studio work), or a CF card plugged into the back, a digital pro won't have but one digital back ('cause they're $12,000 to $25,000 each).

For reviews (really, usage reports) of many digital backs, your first mission is to digest the lengthy yet informative Luminous-Landscape site by Michael Reichmann, who has several years worth of experience with these beasties.

CarnalSigh

Thank you for your response. It was very informative.

claudermilk

MF can be pretty overwhleming to grasp at first. I am assuming you are looking at an SLR-style camera. In which case there are actually four main internchangeable components: the body, the lens, the finder, and the back.

The lens is obvious.

The body is the hub & what everything else connects to. I'ts where the mirror lives, and only sometimes the shutter.

The finder is you viewfinder and can be a pentaprism like we are used to with 35mm format SLRs, or the classic waistlevel, and a couple of other variants. This is where the exposure meter lives, so you have the option of not having AE, and possibly several different varieties.

Finally the back. This is where the film lives, whether it's actual film, or the digital sensor. The nice thing with interchangeable backs is you have the frame-by-frame flexibility of digital. Usinge the included "dark slide" you are able to swap out your film cartridge as needed instead of having to finish the roll as with 35mm film SLRs.


You will need all of these parts for a complete camera. Some have one or more included as a single unit similar to the 35mm SLRS (example: the Pentax 645, or some Mamiya 645 have the back and body as a single unit--you just change film carriers. IIRC, the Pentax might also have the prism integrated).

Digital MF is still horribly expensive (like luxury car prices) & I've seen a lot of angry posting regarding that H3D (apparently they switched to a compleltely proprietary closed-system for the back. If you happen to like Hasselblad's digital backs you're fine--if you prefer Leaf, etc., you're screwed). For playing around with MF, the older film gear is going for a song--I got set up with a Mamiya 645Pro film rig for under $400.

erich6

claudermilk wrote:

For playing around with MF, the older film gear is going for a song--I got set up with a Mamiya 645Pro film rig for under $400.

What was $400? The body and back combined or just the back...?

Erich

claudermilk

It was the following: 645Pro body, with WG401 grip, non-AE prism, 120 back, 80/1.8 lens, lens cap, battery. I later got a manual winder off ebay to bring the total to about $400. All the pieces were BGN items from KEH; a little cleaning & you really have to look closely to see how much use the camera has seen--really just scuffs mainly on the lower corners of the body & a couple on the prism housing. They really do rate conservatively. So for less than $400 you have a complete MF SLR rig all ready to shoot with.

Edit: I rememberd I have a show-off picture of it. This is what I got from KEH:

erich6

claudermilk wrote:

It was the following: 645Pro body, with WG401 grip, non-AE prism, 120 back, 80/1.8 lens, lens cap, battery. I later got a manual winder off ebay to bring the total to about $400. All the pieces were BGN items from KEH; a little cleaning & you really have to look closely to see how much use the camera has seen--really just scuffs mainly on the lower corners of the body & a couple on the prism housing. They really do rate conservatively. So for less than $400 you have a complete MF SLR rig all ready to shoot with.

Edit: I rememberd I have a show-off picture of it. This is what I got from KEH:

Thanks Chris. That's really very reasonable pricing. Also thanks for your assessment on KEH's ratings.

Erich

illuminati919

All I have to say is Hasselbald 500cm, cheapest and still one of the best medium formats in my opinion. Why go to digital, no matter what film is gonna always give you such a different artistic feeling then digital. But if you're willing to spend 39 grand on the h3d then you must know alot more then me and I should not be butting in between a man and his camera .

claudermilk

Hassy cheapest? Not hardly, go check KEH's prices. I looked long & hard at Hassys in large part because of the reputation, but after looking at prices--particularly the lenses--I decided to go with Mamiya instead. As an example, an 80/2.8 lens in BGN condition is $225 for Hassy, $33 for Mamiya. Of course with that said, the 500-series is still a screaming deal these days.