Camera Kit: Half frame 35mm Olympus Pen

The Olympus Pen ticked a couple of feature boxes when it was released in the 1960s. It was smaller than regular reflex cameras, and it doubled the number of shots you could fit on regular 35mm film by using a half-frame format similar to how motion-picture is recorded to 35mm film. They almost look like a rangefinder camera, but retain the advantage of through the lens viewing. 

OlympusPenFT FV

What is it good for?

  • Economy. Having 72 shots on a roll of film has many advantages like packing less film on vacation, changing rolls less often and halving the cost of film.
  • Experiments. Having lots of frames available reduces the relative cost of shooting film. So this is my go-to camera for testing shutter speeds for star trails, lightning, night shots or water motion. If any shots are visually appealing beyond their experiment value, they are still high enough quality for small prints or publishing on the web.
  • Image orientation. With most cameras, landscape orientation is the default and I find 90% of my images are horizontal. Laziness or camera ergonomics are the reason, I guess. The Pen frame is in portrait by default and, surprise surprise, 90% of my images are vertical. It is good to switch things up.
  • Size. This camera is only slightly smaller than a regular 35mm slr, but the lenses are also smaller. A Pen FT and 3 lenses fit in a small pouch making it a perfect kit for travel. 

What's the compromise?

  • Image quality. With images half the size of  full-frame 35mm, the grain is amplified and the images look grittier. This could be desirable depending on your preferences, but it is very noticeable. This relegates the camera to experiments, test shots and non-critical work like vacation snapshots. 
  • Focusing. The viewfinder is small and focusing is a bit trickier than using a camera with a larger mirror.

What's in my camera bag?

  • Cameras: Olympus Pen FT, Olympus Pen FV, 
  • Lenses: 25mm f2.8 Auto-W, 40mm f1.4 Auto-S, 100mm f5.6 Auto-T
  • Accessories: 43mm 8x ND filter, 43mm circular polarizer, UV filter for each lens, cable release

Camera Kit: Medium format film, Hasselblad 500

 

There is something special about an old Hasselblad. Even though it is a cube with no ergonomic considerations, it feels right in your hands. The cla-chunk thud from the curtain/mirror/shutter movements is satisfying. Its looks are timeless. Gooey sentiments aside, there are serious benefits to film medium format.

Hasselblad500

What is it good for?

  • Negative size larger than digital can offer.  There is no digital equivalent to even the small 6x4.5cm format (all digital medium format sensors are 'crop' formats smaller than traditional medium format, but larger than 35mm - more info here). So you can spend $10,000 on a digital crop camera, or $500 on a 6x6cm classic. The negatives are huge, dwarfing the grain to make images look clean rather than gritty.
  • Square format. Though other aspect ratios are available through interchangeable camera backs or other cameras, a square format is often used. It is no better or worse than 4x6 or 4x5, but changing things up is often refreshing. I like the square format to exploit symmetry or make a subject dominant by having it in the center of the frame. The rule of thirds is in the back seat here.
  • Seeing your images sooner. Though you get only 12 or 16 images on a roll, that means you also get to the end of a roll quicker than you would with a 35mm roll. One of my pet peeves of 35mm is having taken some great images and not being able to develop them quickly because there are 20 images still to take.

What's the compromise?

  • Equipment cost. A Hasselblad 500 used to be out of reach of the masses in its heyday. Today, they are relatively cheap, but still more expensive than building a 35mm film kit. KEH and UsedPhotoPro are good places to start looking.
  • Film cost. A roll of 120 film is almost the same price as a roll of 35mm, but you are only getting 12 or 16 pictures on the roll. This triples the cost of film per image.
  • Size. These are not discrete cameras. They are easily strap-mounted for hand-held use, but are heavy and I often use a backpack if i need more than one lens with me. They take up a lot of room and add weight to luggage making them a commitment if you want to travel with them. My Hasselblad with 3 lenses outweighs my large format camera kit with 3 lenses.

What's in my camera bag?

  • Cameras: Hasselblad 500cm with rapid winding crank, waist level view finder, focusing screens (x3)
  • Film magazines: 12 magazine (2), 16 magazine.
  • Lenses: Distagon 50mm f4 CT, Planar 80mm CT f2.8, Sonnar 150mm  f4 CT, Sonnar 250mm f5.6C.
  • Accessories: Extension tubes (10mm, 21mm, 55mm), Hasselblad to Canon EF mount converter, lens focus handles, UV filters, red filter, circular polarizer, cable release

Camera Kit: Digital 35mm, Canon 6Dii

I'm using digital less and less since I discovered mechanical film cameras. Developing the negatives is worth the effort. But digital still has a place, especially when it comes to capturing images of fast-moving sports, children and one-time events where the risks of shooting film outweigh the benefits.

What follows is not a review of this camera, but of using a digital camera alongside film cameras.

Canon 6Dii kit

What is it good for?

  • Unlimited shots. It is handy to not be picture-limited to take images of kids around the house, or on some trips where images might number in the hundreds.
  • Instant gratification. You know what your shot looks like before you leave a scene. You can also spend time experimenting with your lighting set-up. You can get your pictures processed and published online almost instantly.
  • Colour. I keep my film development costs down by only shooting black and white. That means that if I really want a colour image, digital is the easiest way to do it.
  • ISO as a variable for each image. With film you are often stuck at one ISO until you finish a roll. It is nice to use ISO as a variable in the exposure triangle for each image (like large format, actually). 
  • Autofocus. No mechanical film cameras have autofocus and I miss this feature sometimes. Especially when using wide apertures or of fast moving subjects like kids. 
  • Scanning film negatives. I use a DSLR in combination with a lightbox to scan my film negatives. The only reason I don't use a regular scanner is because I already have the camera and don't want another large piece of equipment on the desk.

What's the compromise?

  • Up-front cost. A 35mm ('full-frame') digital camera will cost at least three figures. A film 35mm camera costs barely two figures. And you can shoot a LOT of film for $1000. By the time you've spent that much, a digital shooter will be upgrading their camera to a new model for another $1000 or $2000. A film camera, ironically, will never be obsolete.
  • Size. Compared to film cameras, digital comes with a lot of bulk. This is especially true of the lenses which need to accommodate auto-focus and, often,  stabilization motors.
  • One system (usually). Related to the cost, it is generally the case you need to commit to one system. People are on the hunt for the perfect all-round camera for this reason. This is why the forums are filled with apologists for a given manufacturer (Canon vs Sony, for example). Unfortunately the perfect camera doesn't exist, and a compromise needs to be made, or money thrown at the situation to buy into more than one system. With film, the cameras and lenses are so affordable, you can get 3 systems (street, portrait and landscape, for example) for the price of one digital camera body alone. 

What's in my camera bag?