You didn’t account for enough of the variables in your conclusion. The lighting conditions are too different even though there wasn’t a huge time delay, the lab obviously used different hardware and probably software for the two formats, the metering wasn’t consistent and that could have contributed, and if either or both cameras was operating out of spec that could also skew the results. Fundamentally, the dynamic range is determined by the film type and has nothing to do with format size. It’s the same grains when the stock is the same, ie Portra 400 is the same in both 35mm and 120. Going bigger can provide some real benefits, but dynamic range isn’t one.
I would have loved to have seen an apples to apples comparison. Same metering and film. The 35 looks exposed for background and the 120 looks exposed for the dark foreground. I can NOT draw any conclusions from this.
Me and my partner do mainly B&W and some darkroom work. For printing the 35mm has more notable grain even at 8x10" prints, the medium format is much finger grain wise and you can happily crop in at this print size. Bigger negative = bigger print. But for 8x10 or smaller either format is completely useable. One of the odd gripes my partner has of my 120 over her 35mm, is the 120 film has less shots, so you get to go through rolls faster and you less often get stuck with a less than optimal film (i.e. 100iso in dark conditions). The Hasselblad also has multiple backs (more common for 120 format) completely navigating this issue.
Hey! The number of photos on 120 really doesn't sound like a lot, but for me I actually kinda like it (accept for the cost lol) I feel like it takes some pressure off at times because I can just photograph the subjects or scenes I really like. As nice as it is to have 36 photos on 35mm sometimes it feels like it can take forever to finish a roll lol Totally depends where you are and what you are shooting though I guess.
I always thought film is film - if you use the same film stock in any camera, you should be able to duplicate the dynamic range. The only difference is that the larger format will allow for greater enlargement before losing sharpness ...
Really interesting comparison, funny enough I discovered your channel while searching for vids on the Yashica Mat. It was a pleasant surprise to find a content creator from my neck of the woods too, with locations I could realistically get to. I had ordered a Yashica Mat but unfortunately it was a dud with a stuck shutter, bit of a gamble but it was only £30. But watching your vids and the results you got made me determined to try it so I’ve ordered a fully refurbed 124 G and have a roll of Portra 400 waiting on it. I also shoot with a Pentax SV currently loaded with Fuji Eterna which I’m looking forward to seeing the results of, I’ve never tried it before. Anyway a very long winded way of saying I love your videos (excellent production quality) and wish you every success with the channel. Cheers
Hey there! Yeah there doesn't seem to be too many of us tbf haha Sometimes going for them bargain options can be a win but it always comes with that bit of risk. Glad to hear you ordered a new one though hope all is good with it, they are such a unique cameras to use. I am yet to own an old Pentax but they all seem to be great cameras from what I've seen. It's all good thanks very much appreciate the support ✌
Too many variables that are not a function of the film are mixed in here. Different lenses, different exposures and even different film stock, the Portra being a pro level film with much better exposure latitude and dynamics than the gold (which is evident if you shoot both in 35mm). There are really only two differences between medium format and 35mm *if* you assume all other factors equal (exposure, lenses, equivalent aperture): Grain and resolution. Each film has a specific resolution and a specific size of grain. The logical consequence is that using a larger area of film for the same size picture will give you better resolution and finer relative grain. It's kind of comparable to digital image sensor resolution. If 35mm is 8MP then 120 is 40MP (random approximate numbers just for making an example).
I don't believe one is better than the other, they are just different. One may favor the other depending on the composition, but this can be very subjective from one photographer or artist to the next. Again, the two are just different and it's difficult to draw a firm line on which one is definitively better over the other.
That is probably for a couple of reasons. I am metering the 120 photos myself and I tend to be on the side of overexposing those a little. Whereas the Nikon FE has a built in meter. Also I think most of the 120 photos in this are shot on Portra 400 which just tends to have a slightly lighter look than Kodak gold in 35mm from what I've noticed.
Nice! I would have like to seen some crop to 100% comparison. The same film would also help to find out how big is the dynamic range difference. Maybe in the next one :-)
Sorry, but the test is flawed from the start. You used VERY different films. Portra in itself has WAY more dynamic range. There should not be such a huge difference when using the same film.
Both. With 35mm, it's nice if you want to capture lots of images, do street photography, or just experiment a bit. But 120 film is great when I have a clear vision of what I want to capture. Nothing beats all the detail that is captured on medium format!
I’m not sure the dynamic range is the deepest difference when it comes the medium format. Too much variables as the other person said. There is a certain Medium Format Look, which has more to do with the focal length and depth of field. Even after 15 years in photography I can’t exactly explain what is all about.
Medium format look is due to perspective view. The larger the sensor, the more the compression increases but at the same time the field of view widens at a given focal length. Imagine the compression of a 105mm lens but the field of view of a 50mm lens or 85mm lens compression with the framing of a 35mm lens. The look gets more noticeable as the sensor size increases. It's also why smaller sensors can't get that look because the compression lessens and the FoV narrows too much. You can use a F1.0 or F1.2 lens for a shallow depth of field to blur out the lessened compression but you probably know it's still not the same medium format look.
The look is definitely a big difference between the two but the detail and dynamic range is up there for me. I agree there are definitely a lot of variables but this is just from my own experience over the past year or so using the same lab for all developing and scanning. I do love that medium format look but yeah explaining it is a different story haha
You make beautiful content. This deserve more views and likes
Thanks very much, appreciate that. I will just have to wait patiently on the views and likes haha
Filim
That's that new bootleg ain't even out yet, supposed to come out 2099 for the new century.
You didn’t account for enough of the variables in your conclusion.
The lighting conditions are too different even though there wasn’t a huge time delay, the lab obviously used different hardware and probably software for the two formats, the metering wasn’t consistent and that could have contributed, and if either or both cameras was operating out of spec that could also skew the results.
Fundamentally, the dynamic range is determined by the film type and has nothing to do with format size. It’s the same grains when the stock is the same, ie Portra 400 is the same in both 35mm and 120.
Going bigger can provide some real benefits, but dynamic range isn’t one.
I would have loved to have seen an apples to apples comparison. Same metering and film. The 35 looks exposed for background and the 120 looks exposed for the dark foreground. I can NOT draw any conclusions from this.
Me and my partner do mainly B&W and some darkroom work. For printing the 35mm has more notable grain even at 8x10" prints, the medium format is much finger grain wise and you can happily crop in at this print size. Bigger negative = bigger print. But for 8x10 or smaller either format is completely useable. One of the odd gripes my partner has of my 120 over her 35mm, is the 120 film has less shots, so you get to go through rolls faster and you less often get stuck with a less than optimal film (i.e. 100iso in dark conditions). The Hasselblad also has multiple backs (more common for 120 format) completely navigating this issue.
Hey! The number of photos on 120 really doesn't sound like a lot, but for me I actually kinda like it (accept for the cost lol) I feel like it takes some pressure off at times because I can just photograph the subjects or scenes I really like. As nice as it is to have 36 photos on 35mm sometimes it feels like it can take forever to finish a roll lol
Totally depends where you are and what you are shooting though I guess.
I always thought film is film - if you use the same film stock in any camera, you should be able to duplicate the dynamic range. The only difference is that the larger format will allow for greater enlargement before losing sharpness ...
Really interesting comparison, funny enough I discovered your channel while searching for vids on the Yashica Mat. It was a pleasant surprise to find a content creator from my neck of the woods too, with locations I could realistically get to.
I had ordered a Yashica Mat but unfortunately it was a dud with a stuck shutter, bit of a gamble but it was only £30. But watching your vids and the results you got made me determined to try it so I’ve ordered a fully refurbed 124 G and have a roll of Portra 400 waiting on it. I also shoot with a Pentax SV currently loaded with Fuji Eterna which I’m looking forward to seeing the results of, I’ve never tried it before. Anyway a very long winded way of saying I love your videos (excellent production quality) and wish you every success with the channel. Cheers
Hey there! Yeah there doesn't seem to be too many of us tbf haha
Sometimes going for them bargain options can be a win but it always comes with that bit of risk. Glad to hear you ordered a new one though hope all is good with it, they are such a unique cameras to use.
I am yet to own an old Pentax but they all seem to be great cameras from what I've seen. It's all good thanks very much appreciate the support ✌
Too many variables that are not a function of the film are mixed in here.
Different lenses, different exposures and even different film stock, the Portra being a pro level film with much better exposure latitude and dynamics than the gold (which is evident if you shoot both in 35mm).
There are really only two differences between medium format and 35mm *if* you assume all other factors equal (exposure, lenses, equivalent aperture):
Grain and resolution.
Each film has a specific resolution and a specific size of grain. The logical consequence is that using a larger area of film for the same size picture will give you better resolution and finer relative grain. It's kind of comparable to digital image sensor resolution. If 35mm is 8MP then 120 is 40MP (random approximate numbers just for making an example).
I don't believe one is better than the other, they are just different. One may favor the other depending on the composition, but this can be very subjective from one photographer or artist to the next. Again, the two are just different and it's difficult to draw a firm line on which one is definitively better over the other.
I certainly don't disagree with you on that. It totally depends what suits your style I think. Cheers for sharing your thoughts though 👍
I'm not a pro, just an observer. My question is, how come the 120 images look so much lighter overall? Does it seem to overexpose a bit?
That is probably for a couple of reasons. I am metering the 120 photos myself and I tend to be on the side of overexposing those a little. Whereas the Nikon FE has a built in meter. Also I think most of the 120 photos in this are shot on Portra 400 which just tends to have a slightly lighter look than Kodak gold in 35mm from what I've noticed.
Nice! I would have like to seen some crop to 100% comparison. The same film would also help to find out how big is the dynamic range difference. Maybe in the next one :-)
I don’t shoot on film, but it was interesting to learn about this!
Cheers Tom, glad to hear it. I thought it would make for an interesting comparison.
Great vid! Keep it up! 📸
Thank you 🙌
New to the channel. Fun video and good input. (:
Hey there, welcome and thanks very much appreciate that 🙂✌
Sorry, but the test is flawed from the start. You used VERY different films. Portra in itself has WAY more dynamic range. There should not be such a huge difference when using the same film.
Which film do you shoot then folks?
Both. With 35mm, it's nice if you want to capture lots of images, do street photography, or just experiment a bit. But 120 film is great when I have a clear vision of what I want to capture. Nothing beats all the detail that is captured on medium format!
I’m not sure the dynamic range is the deepest difference when it comes the medium format. Too much variables as the other person said.
There is a certain Medium Format Look, which has more to do with the focal length and depth of field. Even after 15 years in photography I can’t exactly explain what is all about.
Medium format look is due to perspective view. The larger the sensor, the more the compression increases but at the same time the field of view widens at a given focal length. Imagine the compression of a 105mm lens but the field of view of a 50mm lens or 85mm lens compression with the framing of a 35mm lens. The look gets more noticeable as the sensor size increases.
It's also why smaller sensors can't get that look because the compression lessens and the FoV narrows too much. You can use a F1.0 or F1.2 lens for a shallow depth of field to blur out the lessened compression but you probably know it's still not the same medium format look.
The look is definitely a big difference between the two but the detail and dynamic range is up there for me. I agree there are definitely a lot of variables but this is just from my own experience over the past year or so using the same lab for all developing and scanning.
I do love that medium format look but yeah explaining it is a different story haha
I shot film but now I shoot film-um...!
That's what I like to hear 😂