Medium Format

[Sugasmune]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

 

[D Cox]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

Marketing.

If they want to sell to people who used medium format film, calling it "Not All That Big Really" won't increase sales.

 

[bosjohn21]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

medium as I am sure you know is elastic and only refers to something sort of in the middle its not a scientific term or a term with any real finite meaning related to exact measure. They are using the word correctly

 

[57LowRider]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Opinion stated as solid fact, super example.

Medium format is bigger than 35mm and smaller than 4x5. Plenty to choose from in that range. I think that if someone says they shoot MF, then they should qualify it with the sizes if necessary. I use MF 6x6 and 6x9 film cameras and, you know, those formats are both smaller than their names suggest.

 

[stevo23]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

That's just one of the film medium formats. There is 62x46 (645), 60x70, 60x90.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Actually, yes, it matches. But the backs you choose will not.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

But the 60 comes very close at 53x40. Even in film days, that would have been called medium format.

Why do they even call it medium format?

Because they use medium format lenses, bodies and accessories and because the next step up from 24x35 is loosely "medium format". It's not film any more - it's digital. Digital medium format. New world, new terms.

 

[Fogel70]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

You need to do a better research on what this is about.

 

[AlbertTheLazy]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Wrong!!!

Back in film days you'd generally describe as 'medium format' anything that you could load with a roll of 120 film.

I never saw a camera that made 60x60mm negatives. 56x56mm, yes, but not 60x60mm. I used to shoot a lot of 645 -- that's about 56x42mm in real life and still 'medium format'.

Then there were the 40x40mm and 40x28mm (nominal) formats based on 127 film. These were bigger than the 24x36mm on 35mm film that characterised 'miniature' (not 'Full Frame'!) cameras, and so could be considered to be 'medium format'.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Wrong!

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Wrong!

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Wrong!

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Wrong

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Wrong!

Start with a false assumption and you get everything else wrong.

Why do they even call it medium format?

Because it comes between 'miniature' (see above) and 'large format', which was generally considered to start at 1/4 plate (3.25x4.25 inches) and went up through 5"x4", half plate, 7"x5", whole plate, 10"x8", 12"x10" to 15x12". Cameras bigger than those were very rare and generally specially built.

 

[cpkuntz]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

The Hy6 and H5X are medium format. They are 645; even a bit bigger in the case of the Hy6, and spot on for the H5X (56 x 41.5 vs 60 x 45). Remember that the image frame projected onto 120 film never took up the entire 60mm width of the film. A 6x7 (56x70) digital sensor would be great, of course, or even 6x6 (56x56) for that matter, but they would be even more crushingly expensive than other digital medium format options, and therefore not really economical when the Leica S framesize is already enough to provide quality that sets it apart from the hordes of shooters using full frame digital 135 format. It's not really fair to not call these digital bodies medium format, since medium format is quite a large umbrella covering anything bigger than 135 film but smaller than 4x5". If you want something close to the (optical) look that 120 film provides (at least from 645 format cameras), then the Rollei and Hassy options are totally "full frame" or even bigger.

 

[MoreorLess]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

You need to do a better research on what this is about.

My guess is he's just bought a film MF camera to sit in the draw unused next to his Leica's and his F6. Heres an idea Sugamune, if you so desperate to prove the superiority of film perhaps actually post some work rather than these ill judged and researched gearhead arguments.

 

[Sugasmune]

The Hy6 is medium format. It's 645; even a tiny bit bigger (56x45). 6x7 would be great, of course, or even 6x6 for that matter.

56x45 is okay i guess. You can only get 56 x 56 quality on film.

But seriously the Leica S is almost in 35mm format size like most cheaper digital backs.

We need better standards. It's so weird to name different formats with same name.

Pentax 645Z is 2,5 times smaller than 6 x 6 and they market it as medium.

If we don't standardize measures then one day pants size 20 will be called 48, one size fits all.

 

[stevo23]

The Hy6 is medium format. It's 645; even a tiny bit bigger (56x45). 6x7 would be great, of course, or even 6x6 for that matter.

56x45 is okay i guess.

Okay? What do you mean? It's quite a bit larger than 135 already.

You can only get 56 x 56 quality on film.

But seriously the Leica S is almost in 35mm format size like most cheaper digital backs.

We need better standards. It's so weird to name different formats with same name.

Pentax 645Z is 2,5 times smaller than 6 x 6 and they market it as medium.

If we don't standardize measures then one day pants size 20 will be called 48, one size fits all.

So what would you call them? "Medium Format" has always been a very large umbrella. Do you want to create another category?

645 is considerably larger than 35mm - more than 2x - Hasselblad is nearly there:

But hey - I'm with you. Would love to have medium format - 150Mp 6x7 please. Will this happen? Ever? Probably not.

 

[bosjohn21]

this is nothing new. 120 film was used in six four five cameras six six cameras six seven cameras six eight cameras and six nine cameras but we call all of them medium format. Its not really confusing.

 

[JanePete]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

More accurately, the actual size of medium format film aspect ratios/formats have one side that is 56mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

That is almost exactly the closest to the 645 medium format size at 56 x 42. I say that qualifies if comparing to the existing medium format sizes.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

That obviously qualifies since 645 at 56 x 42 was the smallest of the medium format film sizes.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

Probably because anything above 35mm and between large format was considered medium format. I thinks it's fair use.

 

[Sante Patate]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

More accurately, the actual size of medium format film aspect ratios/formats have one side that is 56mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

That is almost exactly the closest to the 645 medium format size at 56 x 42. I say that qualifies if comparing to the existing medium format sizes.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

That obviously qualifies since 645 at 56 x 42 was the smallest of the medium format film sizes.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

Probably because anything above 35mm and between large format was considered medium format. I thinks it's fair use.

... calling their new system "645" when it isn't is not fair, IMO.

 

[DenWil]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

Because of the glass I'd guess. The Mamiyas all work with existing Mamiya 645 glass. The Pentax 645 D/Z work with Pentax 645 glass and 67 glass with an adapter. The Rolleis came with 645 inserts as I recall and the 60 dimension does fill the image circle so at least there is no conversion.

The H Blads use a 1200$ adapter for the V series glass (vs. 200$ for a used Pentax 67 to 645). The Leica S was an original construction without allowing for legacy glass and is 3:2 aspect ratio. Still, a lot of pixels.

All and all in my mind the major rationalization- marketing issues probably made up a chunk and the expectation that the sensors would get up to original 645 or 66 dimensions made up the rest- became to stick with existing designations.

 

[Mike_PEAT]

Probably because anything above 35mm and between large format was considered medium format. I thinks it's fair use.

If you believe what Wiki says:

"Medium format has traditionally referred to a film format in still photography and the related cameras and equipment that use film. Generally, the term applies to film and digital cameras that record images on media larger than 24 by 36 mm (full-frame) (used in 35 mm photography), but smaller than 4 by 5 inches (which is considered to be large-format photography)."

 

[JanePete]

Medium format is 60 x 60 mm.

More accurately, the actual size of medium format film aspect ratios/formats have one side that is 56mm.

Pentax 645Z (43.8 x 32.8 mm) is not medium format camera.

Hasselblad H5X (56 x 41.5mm) is so so, but not really.

That is almost exactly the closest to the 645 medium format size at 56 x 42. I say that qualifies if comparing to the existing medium format sizes.

Rollei Hy6 (60 x 45 mm) almost but not 100%.

That obviously qualifies since 645 at 56 x 42 was the smallest of the medium format film sizes.

Leica S (30 x 45mm) not even close.

Mamiya Leaf Credo 40MP (43.9 x 32.9mm) no medium format at all.

Why do they even call it medium format?

Probably because anything above 35mm and between large format was considered medium format. I thinks it's fair use.

... calling their new system "645" when it isn't is not fair, IMO.

I certainly agree with that.

 

[JanePete]

Probably because anything above 35mm and between large format was considered medium format. I thinks it's fair use.

If you believe what Wiki says:

"Medium format has traditionally referred to a film format in still photography and the related cameras and equipment that use film. Generally, the term applies to film and digital cameras that record images on media larger than 24 by 36 mm (full-frame) (used in 35 mm photography), but smaller than 4 by 5 inches (which is considered to be large-format photography)."

No, it's what I believe and have always known. It's common sense. If they had come out with a film format between 645 and 35mm, what would they have called it? What's between small and medium?

 

[jetals]

[No message]

 

[jetals]

this is nothing new. 120 film was used in six four five cameras six six cameras six seven cameras six eight cameras and six nine cameras but we call all of them medium format. Its not really confusing.