Your favorite 120 Format?

[Neil Poulsen]

6x7 is only "ideal" in the mind of someone who marketed it as such long ago. There is no one ideal format for every image and photographer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

I think 6x6 was called "ideal", because it's the format closest in aspect ratio to 8x10 photographic paper.

 

[Roger Cole]

I think 6x6 was called "ideal", because it's the format closest in aspect ratio to 8x10 photographic paper.

You mean 6x7 and yes, you are correct. That's exactly why (well, aside from "we can market it as ideal because it matches 8x10 paper!")

But so does 6x4.5 And there's nothing sacred about that 4:5 ratio except that happens to be the most common paper size. I often print 10" square with a 1/2" border all around on 11x14 paper. The long side provides some test strips. Likewise, 7x7 square on 8x10 paper with a couple of 1" test strips off the end.

 

[jeff.deponte]

Amazing that (AFAIK) no one markets Instagram (square) paper and square precut mat board. I just ordered up a batch of 16x20 mats with 10x10 windows from Franken Frames. Very reasonable!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[DWThomas]

[ ... ] I often print 10" square with a 1/2" border all around on 11x14 paper. The long side provides some test strips. Likewise, 7x7 square on 8x10 paper with a couple of 1" test strips off the end.

Exactly! In fact for 6x6 printed square (most of my printing of late) I often do "test prints" which may wind up in a small portfolio if successful and I print about 5.1" square on 5.5x(7) paper. I get four pieces plus test strips out of an 11x14 sheet. And then the ultimate of course, with a four blade easel, the sky is the limit!!!

There is no law that says we have to fill the paper or use the whole negative. In my experience, years back some labs offered prints from 35mm on 8x12 paper, but other than that you had to wind up with a cropped photo or oversized borders to get large full negative prints.

 

[Cycler]

I'm not. Rolleis are real classics. Between the 'Cord and 'Flex they took 80% of press pictures from the 1940's to the '60's. The late Victor Blackman took most of the daily Express 'celebrity' pics with his Rolleiflex. And the, considerably, cheaper Yashicamats kept the wedding photo business going nicely.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Very interesting results so far! I knew that 6x6 would be popular but I had not expected it to take such a lead. I´m surprised that 645 has so little interest, since I always thought it would have similar popularity to 6x6 or 6x7. Also quite surprised by the high popularity of 6x9.
Another notable observation: Some users tend to see the choice of format rather dogmatic, and these are mostly to be found among the 6x6 and the 6x7 shooters (albeit to a lesser extent), while others use plenty of different formats.

 

[Neil Grant]

Okay, you´re right, should have added multiple choices from the beginning.

Terrible result, the worst format came top!

 

[Slixtiesix]

Just putting it back to the top so hopefully a few more votes will be added...

 

[Sirius Glass]

Okay, you´re right, should have added multiple choices from the beginning.

Film.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Up.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I'm confused. With 6x6, how do you tell which side of the film itself is up?

 

[Truzi]

I'm confused. With 6x6, how do you tell which side of the film itself is up?

It's the shiny side

 

[Wayne]

The correct answer is 6x7, but I will also accept 6x4.5 The others are just plain wrong.

 

[Kyle M.]

Definately 6x9, with 6x7 being a close favorite. I don't like 6x6 because I just can't get used to square negatives/images, and 645 is just too small. I've never had a chance two try 6x12 or 6x17, I don't think the number of frames or lack thereof I'd get on a roll would bother me as much as that fact that thats just too wide for my taste. 6x9 is where it's at, though the camera choices aren't all that great unless you like folders or plastic bodied point and shoots like the agfa clack. The Zeiss Mess Ikonta's and Super Ikonta's are nice but it's hard to find a good working one, and when you do they're usually kind of expensive. I now have a Medalist and I'm going to try it out tonight, I believe that it's going to be my new favorite medium format camera. It can't be my new favorite camera because that would have to be the Crown Graphic.

 

[Arcturus]

I voted 6x6 as I like composing and printing as a square, but 645 is quickly becoming my format of choice. It offers the automaton and flexibility of 135 paired with the larger negative of 120. It prints well to 11x14 and if I intend to print larger I shoot 4x5. For me, if I need to bring a tripod it might as well be large format. I've shot a lot of 6x9 and it offers a lot of negative to use, but just like 135 I don't like printing that aspect ratio.

 

[film_man]

Funny thing, I voted 6x6 sometime ago but I now find 6x7 to be the one I want.

 

[Gerry M]

#1 6X7: P67
#2 645: ETRSi & GA645
#3 6X6: Kalloflex, Fuji Super 6M, Perkeo 2

My choices may dictated by camera/lens rather than format.

Screwy, huh?

 

[Slixtiesix]

I´m quite stunned that so many are shooting 6x9. I had expected 6x6 and 6x7 to be popular, but 6x9 is a surprise. Since I don´t think that all votes come from people who use Fuji rangefinders I wonder: do you use old folders and box cameras, roll film backs on LF and the like?

 

[DWThomas]

I´m quite stunned that so many are shooting 6x9. I had expected 6x6 and 6x7 to be popular, but 6x9 is a surprise. Since I don´t think that all votes come from people who use Fuji rangefinders I wonder: do you use old folders and box cameras, roll film backs on LF and the like?

I don't shoot a lot of 6x9, but I have an Ercona II (folder) with 105mm f/3.5 Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar and -- my "first new camera," a Kodak Brownie Target Six-20. I respooled one roll of Delta 100 a few years ago to try the latter, since so far I've not found any original negs in the archival debris here. The Ercona (an East German Zeiss ikonta as I understand it) I use from time to time. It only gets eight shots on a roll of 120, and even folded is bulkier and heavier than my Voigtländer Perkeo II, a 6x6, which I use more often.

I have to confess I've yet to print any recent 6x9s, although my Omega B-8 should be able to do it. Mostly I've just scanned and put on the web (silly, I know!)

 

[TheToadMen]

I´m quite stunned that so many are shooting 6x9. I had expected 6x6 and 6x7 to be popular, but 6x9 is a surprise. Since I don´t think that all votes come from people who use Fuji rangefinders I wonder: do you use old folders and box cameras, roll film backs on LF and the like?

Wooden pinhole cameras, Agfa Clack (normal), Agfa Clack (converted into pinhole), Gevabox, Zeiss Ikon folder, GSW690II, ....

 

[Slixtiesix]

I´d like to bring that to the top again hoping for some more votes. I think we should have more than 235 MF users here on Apug ;-)

 

[one90guy]

I voted 6x6 only because that's all I have But have wanted to try 6x9 but have never found 6x9 negative holder for my old Omega enlargers.

David

 

[toguko]

I tried 6x9 and it was like using a huge 35mm camera. For me 6x6 works amazing. I would love to try 6x7 though

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

6x6 without doubt is my favorite. I have a 6x7 camera, a Mamiya RB67, but it's such a tank to haul around that I don't use it much. Might shoot it more in the studio if I ever get a studio again.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I tried 6x9 and it was like using a huge 35mm camera. For me 6x6 works amazing. I would love to try 6x7 though

Welcome to APUG