Switching to medium format for Florida landscapes

What the larger negative actually changes

A 6x6 negative from the Hasselblad is about 3.5 times the area of a 35mm negative. A 6x7 negative from the Pentax 67 is about 4.5 times the area. When you scan these negatives at the same resolution as a 35mm negative, you get proportionally more detail.

The difference is visible in the final print. At 8x10, a 35mm negative and a medium format negative look similar. At 16x20, the difference is significant. At 20x24, the medium format negative has detail that the 35mm negative doesn't.

The grain is also different. A 6x6 negative of Portra 400 scanned at 16x20 has less visible grain than a 35mm negative of the same film at the same print size. The grain is there, but it's smaller relative to the image.

The Hasselblad 500C/M

The Hasselblad 500C/M is the camera I use for most medium format work in Florida. The 6x6 format is square, which requires a different approach to composition than the 3:2 ratio of 35mm. I've come to prefer the square format for landscapes -- it forces a more deliberate approach to composition.

The Zeiss lenses for the Hasselblad are exceptional. The 80mm Planar f/2.8 is the standard lens and it's excellent. The 50mm Distagon f/4 is a useful wide-angle for landscapes. The 150mm Sonnar f/4 is a good portrait and detail lens.

The Hasselblad is slow to use. Each shot requires more deliberate preparation than a 35mm camera. You advance the film, cock the shutter, compose, focus, check the exposure, and shoot. There's no motor drive, no auto exposure, no shortcuts. This slowness is a feature for landscape work -- it forces you to be deliberate.

The Pentax 67

The Pentax 67 is the camera I use when I want the largest possible negative. The 6x7 format is enormous -- 4.5 times the area of 35mm. The SMC 105mm f/2.4 is one of the best portrait lenses ever made, and it's also excellent for landscapes.

The Pentax 67 weighs 1.5 kilograms with the 105mm lens. It's not a camera you carry casually. In Florida, where I sometimes hike to reach good locations, the weight matters. I use a dedicated camera bag for the Pentax 67 and a tripod.

The mirror slap on the Pentax 67 is significant. At handheld speeds between 1/15 and 1/125, the mirror vibration can cause blur. On a tripod with mirror lock-up, it's not a problem. I always use a tripod with the Pentax 67.

Florida landscapes in medium format

The Everglades in early morning. The Florida Keys at sunset. Canaveral National Seashore on an overcast day. These are the locations where medium format makes the most difference. The detail in the vegetation, the water, the sky -- it's a different quality from 35mm.

The light in Florida is high-contrast. Medium format film with good latitude -- Portra 400, Ektar 100 -- handles this better than 35mm film at the same print size. The larger negative captures more tonal information.

I use Portra 400 for most medium format work in Florida. Ektar 100 for bright-light landscape work where I want maximum sharpness and saturation. HP5 for black and white. The medium format negative of HP5 stand-developed in Rodinal 1:100 is one of the best combinations I've found for Florida landscapes.

What I gave up

Medium format is slower, heavier, and more expensive than 35mm. A roll of 120 film gives you 12 exposures on 6x6 or 10 on 6x7. A roll of 35mm gives you 36. The cost per exposure is higher.

The cameras are heavier and bulkier. The Hasselblad 500C/M with a lens weighs about 1.2 kilograms. The Pentax 67 with the 105mm lens weighs 1.5 kilograms. Neither is a camera you carry casually.

For street photography and travel, I still use 35mm. The Leica M3 or M6 with a 50mm lens is the right tool for that work. Medium format is for when I'm going somewhere specifically to make photographs and I have time to be deliberate.

More from the journal

Related