Hi All,
having looked on ebay a fair bit in the last couple of weeks i realize that for the cost of a couple of lenses I don't use and am happy to sell, I could get a half decent MF setup. . . i.e. for about £500.
I need to know a bit more about the Options i have. You may be willing to give me some advice.

What I want, or what I think I want ;-) is square format ( though I can live with 645 if needs be and it's a good cheap option ) , a prism viewfinder, a 120 back and a wide angle lens ( equivalent to a 24 or a 28 on 35mm ). I need to be able to shoot handheld when I want to as well.

From what I have seen, I could get a Mamiya 645 with maybe a couple of lenses and/or a couple of backs for that. But which model is best? I'm not fussed about AF but wouldn't object to it.
Bronica do a 645 and a square format (SQ) but again I don't know which model is the one to go for as Bronica have their fans and their detractors. . .

Pentax 645s are expensive, and Hasselblads are cheaper than they were but still quite pricey as I guess you are paying for the name. ( there was guy in Germany selling a hassy wide for 1500. . . argh! I want, i want. . . I can't afford/justify! )

Mamiya rb67 and rz67 are good value secondhand but I get the impression that they are not for handheld use really. . . unless you are built like a Gorilla. I'm more of the Gibbon type of build ;-)

A Mamiya 7ll would be perfect but that ain't going to happen right now unfortunately as they are nearer the £1000 mark secondhand. Or are they really really worth saving for?
( did you sell yours Gerard? )

Other questions are -
What is the focal equivalent of a 24 or 28mm lens on MF cameras? ( most MF cameras seem to have an 80mm on them, so I'm guessing that's a 50mm equivalent?? )
Are MF cameras usable in dull conditions, with a 2.8 lens? compared to a DSLR at 200 iso with a 2.8 lens for example?
Where do you get good cheap film in the UK? and where do you recommend I get film developed in the UK?
Will I need a light meter? or can I use my dslr to meter with?

Thank you in advance for any input you can offer, you kind people ;-)

Jon

Jon

no I am about to put it on ebay. Maybe you want to talk to me privately about it I may be able to scratch out a deal I would be happier knowing it was going to someone I know than otherwise. The 80mm is in fact the 50mm equivalent.

I have got film from Mx2 computer food at a resonable price they also have a good range.

I have used Peak imaging for developing film or a local printer in Birmingham. For the 120 film I have shot I just get the negatives developed then scan with my flat bed which works well. My scanner only does 35mm so I could get a strip scanned but my dad has better scanner that does 120 film. I have looked at smilar set up to the ones you mention but as I already have a number of cameras that dont get out much I thought it best to steer clear. My medium format camera is a 70 year old Agfa Billy Record along with a Weston Master light meter that works well and looks retro cool.

The bulk of medium format puts me off I am currently looking at a Ricoh GRV1 as a take anywhere high quality camera to try to kick start something

Before dismissing Hasselblad check out the Hasselbald forum:
www.hasselbladinfo.com

I think going with the blad will give you the far most flexible and enjoyable system. And you can easely start with your 500£ limit and slowly build it from there.
And there is a really knowledgable and vivid community found on the forum. Pluss you know you have good gear that lasts.

Theres also the biggest variety of gear, digital backs, lenses and other stuff to get second hand on the marked compared with other MF systems.

I get the impression you're planning to use it largely for landscape. If so, Pentax 67 is a big winner. The 55mm (28mm equiv) f4 lens is brilliantly sharp. It's very easy to use and use handheld, especially if you've used SLRs to date.

Fits your budget too.

I'll look up the pentax on ebay, thanks. And look at the Hasselblad forum to see what they have to say. Thanks guys.
Jon

Hi Jon. Many, but many people ask me advises about medium format cameras.

I tell you my opinon : Mamiya 645 AF ... 645AFD, AFDII and AFDIII is more expensive and is only a good option if you think in a digital back in future, if not, 645 AF, a back and a 80mm f2.8 lense is a very good choice.

In future you can buy more film backs and more lenses. 645 AF is a superb camera for start, and a lot of friends of mine who buy it by my advices, are very happy.

I talk about what i use at many time whitout any problems. I have a 645 AFD and a RZ67 PROII ... but RZ67 is a more expensive system and very heavy, but with supreme quality.

Thanks Rui. I'm glad to have your advice. The AF does seem expensive ( about 800 pounds ) but there are only two on ebay right now in the UK and they are both AFD. . . . So the Pro is not recommended? It's manual focus I know. . . but I can get one for about 250 pounds.
Jon

It´s depends of you eyes :-)
Is you have nice eyes and can do a good job in manual focus, is a nice chose and less expensive. But if possible, buy it with AE meter viewfinder.
I past i use a 645 Pro but need to sell it, my eyes are older and i have some trouble to do a nice focusing with it.
But with some time you will find a 645AF for about 500/600 complete ... 645 AF is very nice camera.

Good point about the eyes Rui! I could try to use f22 and pray ;-) I'll keep my eyes open for the AF then.
thanks,
Jon

You have here one :

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/MAMIYA-645AF-645-AF_W0QQitemZ350300292778QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Photography_Film_Cameras_ET?hash=item518f8646aa

and a back :

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/MAMIYA-645-AF-Filmback-Dark-Slide-645AF_W0QQitemZ370236124185QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Photography_Film_Cameras_ET?hash=item5633caec19

and a lense :

http://cgi.ebay.de/Mamiya-AF-2-8-80-fuer-645-AF-AF-D_W0QQitemZ360232175143QQcmdZViewItemQQptZDE_Elektronik_Computer_Foto_Camcorder_AnalogeKameras_PM?hash=item53df82c627

But this is now, i have seen in recent past a complete 645 AF system for 500 euros in ebay, but lots of people are starting with medium format and price just inflates :)

If you haven't purchased already, I cannot recommend too highly a Bronica SQ-A or SQ-B and either the Zenzanon PS 50mm or 40mm lens. The SQ-A is slightly better specified. The 40mm lens has a 95mm front element filter thread which makes using screw-in filters or even Lee filters a very expensive option and, to be fair, there's little real difference in angle of view between the 40mm and 50mm. Getting what you want for £500 might be a bit of a stretch, though.

Another alternative would be a Mamiya C220 or C330 twin-lens reflex. These are built like tanks and take interchangeable lenses. They are, generally speaking, less expensive than the Bronica and you should be able to get what you want within budged. The lenses are as sharp as any I've ever used. I used to do weddings and portraits in the early / mid 1980s using a C330 and it was a fabulous camera.

Best of luck. Paul.

I'm coming round to the SQ A myself after a lot of reading. . . Without the prism finder ( or I could get a non metered prism ) they are quite cheap with the 80mm standard lens. I shall have to buy a light meter but they are less than a tenner on ebay. Then I have to learn how to use it ;-) I shall try to get one with a 50mm or buy one later and sell the 80mm.
The great big Mamiya RB67 cameras are pretty cheap too. They are beasts but look so cool. . . Maybe if I find i want even more detail or want to print billboards. . .
thanks,
Jon

I just bought some film for my charity shop Agfa Isolette ll, so that should be interesting. . . Old cameras are great ;-)

Jon,

An SQ-A and a non-metered prism with a 50mm lens (use the sunny 16 metering method if needs be) is a very portable and top quality tool. The RB67 and RZ67 ranges are excellent but they are huge by comparison and not something I'd want to have to lug around the countryside.

I've had a variety of MF kit over the years and the only cameras I truly miss are my SQ-B, my Mamiya C330 and Mamiya 7. There are loads of other great cameras out there but if portability / flexibility and usability are key, the Bronica and Mamiya C330 are probably as good as you'll get (at a reasonable price).

Regards, Paul.

Just to make your choice even more difficult, or to join me in drooling saliva onto the screen:

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtl_bessa_iii.htm

Never choose a camera based in "look so cool" ... you must use your eyes to see the world from inside camera and lenses, not to see the cool camera ;-)

Lot´s of people i know who have buyed a medium format camera by "cool" factor or "brand" factor, that camera ends in ebay or in the desk as "bibelot", shure there are exceptions.

Thanks Rui ;-) I have been warned . . . I'll get one for a doorstop if it's really cheap :-)

That looks cool Balazs, and it's a cool brand. . . Oops!
Jon

Jon - be careful taking Rui's advice - you'll end up as Goat Lover #2 of 1x :)))

Well, goats are "medium format" animals, aren't they?

Ouchh ... my goats are ruin another thread ... can i call moderators T-Rex to eat all goats ?? :)))

Does anyone have any experience with the Bronica ETRS? I'm looking at a couple at the moment. Not sure if they're worth buying or not though.

Thanks,
Lee

Hi Lee

I have a complete system of the Bronica ETRSi, including bodies, backs, lenses, viewfinders etc. I still use it but not as much as I did in the past. It's a very nice system and very modular. Lots of accessories are still available on the used market, mostly on Ebay. The lenses are sharp, although I understand that the PE lenses are better than MC lenses. It's easy to handle and engineered nicely. They don't make them anymore, so if possible, run some film through it to make sure it functions properly. I'm sure you'll get other opinions, but I love mine and just recently bought some darkroom stuff and am completing the circle from where I started. I embrace digital very much, but there's something about the feel, smell, and tactile sensation of film that draws me back in. Have fun!

It s a 645 format camera, or I might have been interested in one of those.

Just won an SQ-A with WLF and a 120 back on ebay, and an AE prism. All for about £130! Just missed out on a 40mm lens but there are a couple of 50mm ones going.

What's the difference between a 50 S and a 50 PS? The PS is £250 whereas the S is £150. Is it worth the difference? I shall try looking it up anyway.
Jon

The 50 S is the earlier version of the lens. The 50 PS is the later version of the lens and is supposedly sharper. Search You Tube for SQ-A and there are some videos about the SQ-A just like the one you won. I would go with the PS lens, but it all depends on your budget. Now you've got me looking again..... :) Hope you enjoy your new purchase.

Thanks Steven, I just went for the S50 as the PS doesn't seem to be that much better. MF quality will be enough of a jump from digital even at less than absolute optimum I reckon.

Yeah, I know. I was just hijacking your thread because I was thinking about buying one myself. Sorry :-)

-Lee

Hey, it's not my personal thread ;-) Jump in whenever. Ebay has plenty of ETRS stuff at the moment. That and the Mamiya 645 seem to be the cheap options.
Jon

Is this really true Jon? Do MF cameras produce significantly better quality images than say the latest crop of Prosumer and professional digital cameras such as the 7D, D300 and 1Ds, D3 ranges for example?

This isn't an argument Jon but a genuine enquiry as I have no experience of other camera formats other than my recent digital gear.

I'm wondering if MF film is so better quality-wise why so many use digital these days including many professionals.

Curious,
John

I use both (5D II and Pentax 67ii). From my experience, the difference shines through in larger prints. Medium and large format film cameras print much more detail. 35mm is debatable. I'm not talking about "sharp" lines in an image, which digital creates with ease at any image size. Rather, I'm talking about fine detail (skin textures, wood grain, etc) and richness of color that are found within the lines. The key is to compare large prints, and you'll easily see the difference.

The pros I know (mostly wedding and newspaper photogs) use digital, because of the vastly improved work flow. However, many of the fine art photogs I've met (in LA and western US) still use medium and large format, especially for landscapes.

I'd like to do this, never had the opportunity to view an exhibition of large prints yet and it would be an interesting exercise.

JP

I'd like to do this, never had the opportunity to view an exhibition of large prints yet and it would be an interesting exercise.

JP

I didn't know this Eric, I have limited experience in photography and exclusive to digital. Mind, I've given myself licence to be inaccurate with my colours on occasion, Mother Nature has her off days and needs a helping hand sometimes..
;-))

Thanks Jon :-)

I just bought one. Some time ago I bought an old Rolleicord IV, but it kept jamming, so I never had the pleasure of using it all that much. Hopefully the ETRS will serve me better.

-Lee

A lot of pros don't use digital. There are a fair number of fine art photographers who like the detail and feel of MF and large format. And they aren't just the old school who were brought up on film. I think the tonal subtleties in monochrome are supposed to be better. And in colour for that matter. Fine detail without being as hard as sharpened digital perhaps. . . A good scanner is probably critical too.
I shall find out, as I got my bronica sq a today ;-) For the price of the 10-20 I am selling on ebay that I hardly ever used.
I think for landscape, a 6 by 7 camera would be amazing.
Your work is amazing anyway John so don't worry about it ;-)
Jon

Cheers Jon, I wasn't in a quandery about defecting to film for quality reasons, merely quizzical as to the reality between the two formats. I would though as mentioned like to see some large film produced prints in an exhibition sometime to gauge myself.

:-))

Oh well, the first film I put through my Bronica SQA came back today. . . . completely blank! As in clear with no trace of anything even faintly anywhere. . . I assume that means a great deal of light got to it somehow??
I shall send off number two film that I shot last week, today, I hope whatever I did wrong first time wasn't repeated. maybe I should remove the film in darkness??
Learning curve. . . I think I just spun off the road at the first one. . .
Jon

Blank ? You meank the negatif is completely black or completely transparent ?

120 film can be removed in daylight, but avoid do that in direct sunlight, or you have some light leacks in borders of last photos exposed.

completely transparent. Does that mean it was not exposed at all? I haven't had to think about this stuff for so long. . . sorry to be so dumb. They shouldn't let me near a real camera.

Or maybe, you left the back slide in!

Or maybe, you did not read the light properly!

Have you tried taking off the film back, looking through the cam to check if the shutter works?

It it´s transparent, the film never se light, so maybe you forgot darkslide in the back of camera ? I don´t know that Bronicas, but Mamiyas didn´t shoot if darkslide is in the back.

Another problem is : do you put the film in right position ? If you put film in wrong way, the paper can avoid light to touch in sensitive film.

Another option : if you shoot blank with camera with lense pointed to you, you see lense shutter to open and close ??

I don't think the Bronica will shoot with the darkslide in, and I remember taking it out, so at least one shot should have been OK.
I think I loaded the film right. I followed a picture tutorial on the net. The reel wound through to the empty spool.
I shall test the lens shutter as you suggest. It certainly sounded like it was working but I shall have a look.
I shall also take the camera down to my camera club on thursday and see if any of the 'old boys' know their way round a Bronica and can advise.
Thanks Rui ;-)
Jon

All the above points that Rui has mentioned are the same points he told me when i first got my RZ67.

And also what Lars said is also very good advice.

Once you work it out you will never look back....... I love my RZ so much so tomorrow i will be picking up a M645 Pro tl....... cant wait!

I have one M645 pro and it´s a grat camera, Glen. I only sold it because my eyes are older and have some trouble with manual focus and have now a 645 AFD, superb camera.

By the way, the RZ67 AE viewfinder is so good ... I usualy take with me sekonik lightmeter only when i shoot with large format viewcamera, but last weekend i take it with me and RZ67, and matricial and spotmeter of camera give me the same measures as sekonic, exactly the same. I have tested with the EOS 5D MKII and there are huge diferences in light reading ! Ouchh ! I hate modern cameras ! :)

Jon, hope you solve your problem soon. As i can remember, i know a guy with same problem with you, and i found the problem is he put film in wrong position. The outside paper of 120 film must be wounded exactly for the oposite side of lenses. Outside paper must be wounded ir order to be in in contact with the back plate.

Great stuff Glen! If I can get the results I want I'll probably end up with a wider format camera to go with the square of my SQA as I am coming back round to the wider format again, though square is still very nice.

Yes Rui, best decision i made was to get the RZ viewfinder.... thanks to you!

Interesting you say that your digital light meter is not accurate. I have been shooting lots of polaroid of late and have been using my D3 as a light meter and found that i have to stop down a lot more to get the required results. I think a new light meter is on the cards!

Pentax is out with a new digital 645, about 1/3 the price of the Hasselblad digital, but still too much for me. I never liked Hasselblads (film), although I had to own them to be competitive. *Loved* my Rollei TLR, though.

@JBA On my Bronica Etrsi, the black side of the paper leader has to be facing towards the front of the camera and go over the pressure plate when loading film into the back. The camera will not operate if the dark slide is left in place. So that's not the problem. It's also possible that you had the multi exposure switch in the wrong position. Watch the wheel on the bottom of the back and see if it's moving when you advance the film. I would waste a couple rolls of film and practice a bit before shooting anything important. If the processed film was transparent then it received no light at all. If the multi exposure switch is in the multi mode, a red line will appear on the side of the viewfinder as you look through it. Hope this helps.

I don´t say that. Sekonic is very accurate, what i said is Mamiya RZ67 AE meter is so acurate as sekonic and EOS 5D MKII not, give diferent readings.

Maybe my terrible English don´t help me at all, today my translator-goat is in vacations :)

Sorry i understood you but it was my English that came out wrong!

I have tested some Hassyes and don´t like also, not very pratical cameras, only first class materials and are huge. The price is very high but for me the most important it is impossible to se the diferences from two photos of same subject taked with mamiya or hassye, so better chose less expensive one with same quality and more easy to use and easy to find spares and parts. But in 6x7 i never found better lenses than the Mamiya-Sekor RZ lenses, for me, the best of best !

Another day i made some "macro" tests with Mamiya RZ lenses mounted in the Horsemann 4x5" optical bank and EOS digital camera as back ... ouch, the quality is outstanding !

Tks King,never heard before, nice news, i found only this :

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0503/05031502pentax645digital.asp

Let se what happens ... :)

Thanks Steven,
I had to change the position of the multi exposure switch to get the shutter to fire at all for the first exposure. No idea what that was about. I put it back to the normal position and it seemed to be fine. The arrow marker came up ok so I don't think the film was in the wrong way round. The film wound through to the bottom spool.
I'll see if the second film is the same and consult some film savvy guys at my camera club for hands on advice.
Also I can try the 80mm on it for some exposures. The 50mm might be playing up.
btw It's a right pig to change lenses with no film in the camera, and it's also hard to test fire the shutter with no film. . .
Jon

If you put film in wrong position, you see the arrow mark. Remeber the black part of film is turned to lense side

If I can't see the arrow mark why is it there? I'm confused. How do I know where to stop winding when loading etc. It sounds like I may have put the film in the wrong way ( twice ) I think I shall keep the second film to practice with. There wasn't much of importance on it.
thanks, Rui.
Jon

remeber, interior part of the paper in begining of roll film is allways black. That black part must be turned to the lense :)

If you are put roll film in wrong position, you can join a club with millions of members who do the same mistake in begining, it´s so normal :)
And hope that is the real problem, otherwise can be a serious problem in camera :)

LOOK : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmT72aqfq_g :)

If you want to test fire the shutter on a Bronica without loaded film, the multi exposure switch must be in the multi position and the dark slide removed. Also make sure the mirror is not in the locked up position. Try to find a manual on the net for your particular model of Bronica. It gets easier as you use it more.

Or download the user manual John..... :-)

It's fun when you mistakenly try to load an already-exposed roll. The unfamiliar pattern on the paper backing will make you stop and think...what is going on here? If you are lucky,' you will figure it out in time.

King, we have a lot of experience, (you much more than me) to use and feel all the pattern of roll film in total darkness :)

I never made that mistake of load a already exposed film, when i have a exposed one i put in special plastic container light prof with "exposed" label outside.

Th big mistake i have made, is load a roll film of Delta 100 in one back, then need to use fast 400 Asa BW film, take the Delta out of the back inside the dark bag and by error put it in "exposed" container. Then in my home, take all exposed film containers, develop it all and in the end see a total transparent film and spend 3 weeks thinking what goes wrong ... then i remember that idiot Ilford Delta roll i take out of the back unexposed... ufff what a mess.

My real problem is with 4x5" loaders, if i don´t pay to much atention to what i do when shoting with view camera. I have 8 loaders and if something goes wrong not dificult to expose same sheet 2 times or develop a unexposed one :)

Now I am sure I put the film in the wrong way round. I remember, when I was trying to get the 'exposed' film spool's sticky tab to seal the roll, it seemed to be facing the wrong way to stick down properly. . . I think that might have been a clue . . duh! ;-(

I already downloaded the manual, maybe i need better reading glasses. . .

I'm pretty sure the second roll I 'shot' is the same. Can I sort of wind the film back, reload it and use it again? bad idea i suspect ;-)

Jon

It´s the best clue you can have, means your camera is ok :)


You can do that in total darkness with no problem at all :)
Buy a light proof bag, is the best friend of a film photographer, and sooner or later you will need one ;)

I never had any trouble loading and unloading 120 roll film even in direct sunlight, although I would avoid that if possible.


And that is just one of the potential mistakes when working with large format cameras. You can also misload the film in the holder such that the film may fall out into the body of the camera when the slide is removed, or jam inside the holder such as the dark slide cannot be fully replaced. Have you tried that yet?

And you can, if you are pretty ignorant, load the sheet film with the base, rather than the emulsion, toward the lens.

Here's a sheet film trick: Studio photographers (when I was working) desired to maintain control of color balance by buying significant quantities of a specific film batch, thoroughly testing that film for color balance, then keeping it in the refrigerator. But if you are shooting 8x10 and 4x5 film from different batches, then matching color can be problematic. The solution? Buy only 8x10 inch film and cut it down to 4x5 as necessary. One 8x10 sheet cut into four fits the 4x5 film holder exactly.

Now you have the film-identifying notch on only one of the four pieces of 4x5 film. How do you know, in the dark, which is the emulsion side?

That is the sort of trick from pro that I love to read about. Reminds me when I used to browse guitar forums and learn how some famous musicians use to have lots of such tricks, which sound pretty rudimentary in the first place, in our high-tech world with so much things out-of-the-box - but when you have your senses trained enough you figure out your own issues with your own solutions. I assume that is what real craft is about in some way, as opposed to just use the latest gear and pieces of software.

Make sure the notch is on the upper right corner of the film and restack in the box as you cut each 8x10 or load your film holders right away or moisten your finger and touch the edge of the film very carefully. Also make sure you reverse the dark slide to the black side after the film is exposed to avoid double exposure. You're not the only old timer around here King...... :)

I never do that, but if i will do, shure i cut a little bit in corner of the sheet, same side of the original notch, or there is a bether way ? :)


I never do that :) I do all ok if i go alone with viewcamera and with fresh mind. Unfortunely i´m a very distracted guy, and just a phone call during the process to do mistakes :)


Me to, shure King have a lot to share with us, i hope he do it more times :)

Yes, good. What if there are no notches and your boss tells you not to spit on the film?


Did I claim to be the only old-timer? How old are you? If you were born after the first atomic explosion on the face of the earth, you are a youngster.

That's a pretty good solution, but what if you open a box of 4x5 film that has been cut by someone else and there are no notches and, as I suggested to Steve Millman, your boss has told you not to spit on the film to determine the emulsion side?

When cutting 8x10 sheet film down to size, one of the obvious goals is to handle the film as little as possible. Cutting notches and moistenng the emulsions are non-essential steps.

By the way, you can't use just any old paper cutter to do this as the film must be almost *perfectly* cut in order to fit into the 4x5 holders (you can cut to 5x7 as well). How do you make perfect cuts in the dark without chopping off a finger?

I'm available if asked. I think few people are interested (present company excepted) in view camera tricks and sheet film practices.

I don´t know, King. I never ever touch or see a 8x10 sheet. Tell me :)

I'm in a darkroom, how is my boss ever gonna know. :) I guess I'm still a youngster then. I stand corrected, as usual. :)

Now we have to talk about either integrity or your desire to spit on your film.


Those who spend much time in a completely dark room (as opposed to a printing dark room where there can be plenty of light), know that spatial relationships can be remembered rather precisely (where did I put those scissors?) and that the sense of touch is heightened, if only while the lights are out.

Film tends to curl toward the emulsion. If you hold a piece of sheet film (4x5 or larger) by the edges, you can perceive pretty quickly in total darkness in which direction the film most readily bends. That's the emulsion side.

Does that mean you are not going to answer my question?

New question (a bit off topic, I guess, but fits with the most recent posts):

You have loaded a roll of 35mm film in your camera, but change your mind and decide to load a different film. You rewind the film, but forget to stop before the end of the film re-enters the cannister.

You don't have a factory-made film retrieval tool handy. How do you get the leader out of the cannister? This one is for you, Steve (and this is also a hint).

A thick piece of paper with inverted (sticky side out) cellotape? Slide the tape in and make it stick?
Steal a thin crochet needle from an elderly lady (born before the first atomic explosion) and try to get hold of one of the guiding holes... of the film
Or go to a place completely dark or use a black bag and open the cannister in it?

I haven't got a clue really, but I do like riddels!

Cheers

Really good guesses, Willem!

Take the leader from the second roll of film, stick it in your mouth to thoroughly moisten an inch or two, then insert it through the felt until the moistened area is entirely within. Next, rotate the film inside the cannister in the rewind direction (use the spindle at one end) until it catches on the moistened film and begins to pull it into the cannister.

Now, gently and slowly, pull the moistened leader out of the cannister with the leader of the other roll stuck to it. Voila!

You may have to do this more than once to retrieve the leader. Alas, I've had to do it *dozens* of times, so I'm pretty good at it.

Good one :) And that is allways a mess when scan film :)

Now I know the origin of the expression: "a spitting image" ....

I give the whole thing to my 4 year old kid. I'm positive he will figure out how to do it :))

Come, now, jacques...you know that I implying, "How do you get the leader out of the cannister, leaving the cannister intact and the film undamaged." Using your method, I think a 2-year-old would probably be adequate.

But my boss doesn't want me to spit on the film.

Back to the topic of the original post:
if the ratio of focal length of the lens/diagonal of the film is the same, the lenses will give equivalent coverage.

The so-called "normal" lens has a focal length of about the length of the diagonal of the film, although, in practice, slightly longer focal lengths are provided (see below).

If the MF camera is square format, the answer depends on the crop, if any. To answer this question for a square-format camera, it is best to first hypothesize the film dimension if it were rectangular. So, for instance,

35mm film is approximately 35mm x 23mm with a diagonal of approximately 42mm (although the "normal" lens is usually about 50mm.
An equivalent piece of 120 film would be approximately 56mm x 38mm with a diagonal of approximately 68mm (although the "normal" lens is usually about 80mm).

Now 50/42 (35mm "normal"/diagonal of film) is approximately equal to 80/68 (MF "normal"/diagonal of crop equivalent to 35mm) so there you see the equivalence in action.

A good rule of thumb is this:
Normal: Focal length approximately equal to diagonal of film
Wide: Focal length approximately 1/2 diagonal of film
Telephoto: Focal length approximately 2x diagonal of film

It is no coincidence that MF photographers often have in their kit 50mm, 80mm and 150mm prime lenses.

35mm photographers often have 24mm (or 35mm), 50mm (often unused) and 105mm lenses (great for portraits).

I thought you would get especial enjoyment out of my solution...no pun intended.

Correct. Sorry for the distraction sir.. :)

Yes, for 6x4,5 i have that lenses, and same for 6x7 : 65mm/110mm/180mm and a 90mm, not so wide as the 65mm and a little more than the 110mm, 50mm equivalent to 35mm ff.

Thanks for the lens explanation King. I shall commit it to memory ;-)

I have a 50mm and an 80mm and have been looking for a 150mm but will wait until I think I need one as I need to consolidate what I like to shoot with the SQA. I know what I think I want to shoot, and that needs a wide lens, but the possibilities of the medium, once encountered often open up new creative directions. . .
The 40mm looks good but is sought after and a bit expensive. . .
cheers,
Jon