Cheap medium format- which one and how?

Hi,

I've been playing with an old slr camera that i got off ebay and a book i found in smiths on basic photography. I've had some rubbish results and some cool ones too. I know i should learn to walk before i run, but i have a need to get into medium format. Looking on ebay, i've come to think a lubitel 166U is the way forward, but they seem to sell at much higher prices (£35) than i've heard people get them for (£10). Can anyone tell me if this is the best choice to go for, what i should expect to pay and if shops still sell them new (i have heard this.)
Also, does anyone know of any photography clubs in brighton?

Thanks ian

Well, on a Pentax site I shouldn't mention it, but....

The Lubitel is very cheaply made, horrible to use and will not deliver results any better than 35mm. In fact, it will probably be worse.

Why do you need to get into medium format? I ask because this will be relevant to your choice of camera. Unlike 35mm, medium format cameras are not necessarily general purpose models and some will be better suited to some uses than others.

As a general point, TLR cameras are simple and reliable and a good Rolleiflex or Rolleicord will deliver excellent results at reasonable prices. The Yashicamat is cheaper and also excellent, even if not engineered to Rollei standards.

If you can afford it, the Pentax 67 is superb, but second hand ones are often very well used and abused by prodessional use.

The original Pentax 645 is relatively low priced now, and a very fine camera. But does 645 offer a big enough jump in quality from 35mm?

If you use 35mm as well and move to a medium format SLR I suggest you choose one where the lenses operate the same way rounf for focusing and aperture, to avoid confusion. So Pentax users usefully move to Pentax or Bronica. Nikon users the same. All other makes operate the reverse way.

I second that, the Lubitel can be (and usually is) pretty horrible. Good for experimenting, and for a bit of abstraction, but as for improvements in quality of 35mm it REALLY doesn't do the job. It's along similar lines to the Lomo, which is famed for barely believable distortion, light leaks, focus, etc. etc. check http://www.lomography.com/ for details. It's quite a fun thing to mess about with, and shows that it is usually the photographer and not the equipmnet that make interesting shots, but I would humbly suggest it can't really be considered 'quality'.

I looked into Medium Format a while ago, and the TLRs were pretty much univerally recommended as the cheapest way in. A decent Rolleicord is around £200, a bit less for a Yashicamat or a slightly battered example - the Rollei is very well built, so if the optics and mechanisms are decent a few scuffs won't be the end of the world. You can get interchangable lenses, but these seemed (in comparison) very expensive - I assume a lot of people just stuck with the standard lens (I think about 80mm? Could be wrong) and hence not a lot of non-standard lenses were sold. There is also the seagull of which I have no idea, but I recall they go for around £170 brand-new, which for some reason has me doubting their quality - does anyone have any experience with those?

I found the Pentax SLRs way outside my budget, a few Bronicas seemed to be reasonably priced. Expect to pay around £350-£400 for a decent example. I once looked at a Pentax 67, the body looked as though it had been used to hammer nails in but the lens was immaculate. It was going for £220 at a camera fair, wish I'd bought it but got the missus a Z1-p instead.

I would suggest a decent TLR, and don't forget to budget for a lightmeter (in general, you have to spend quite a bit on medium format to get built-in metering). Unfortunately, Medium Format isn't cheap (unless you're after the Lomo stuff).

Matt

Just to expand on Matt's comments, the Rolleiflex is a fixed lens camera (75mm or 80mm), although Mutar lenses that bayonet into the filter rings can be used to alter the focal length. These are rare and very, very expensive. There is a Wide Angle Rollei with 55mm lenses (£3000 new, maybe £1500 used if you can find one!) and a Tele-Rolleiflex with 135mm lenses. These are the sort of things Bailey used in the 1960s!

The Seagull is fairly good but a bit crudely made. The Yashica 124G is the one of choice from that range, look for around £150 mint.

Don't forget the Mamiyaflex TLRs, which do have a range of interchangeable lenses, but which are bulky.

Hi John

I made a mistake in my post (which I feel you were too polite to correct!) regarding interchangable lenses. I have held a set of interchangable lenses for a TLR (comprising view and object lenses with focus gearing on a bracket/backboard), which I originally assumed were for a Rollei as I was in the process of trying them out (although I never bought one). In fact, as your post has jogged from my memory, these were actually for a Mamiya TLR which was being sold at a camera fair. a quick google search confirms the Rollei and Yashica TLRs have fixed lenses that cannot be interchanged, and can only be adapted by use of external lenses (much like the wide-angle adapters for some digital video cameras etc.).

Hence, if you wish to have interchangable lenses go for the Mamiya, although these lenses can be quite expensive. I think £200-£250 is a good price for a decent Mamiya C330.

Matt