rulnacco
Well-known
I voted prism--because that's how I've been shooting my MF SLRs mostly lately. But the real answer for me would be "depends."
I've got an RZ67 and a couple of Hasselblads, and I've got both the Mamiya and Hasselblad 45 degree prisms.
If the cameras are on a tripod in the studio, I usually use the prism. That's because in there, I'm normally shooting rather tight, and the prism is not only a little easier to use on a tripod, it allows me to "lock in" a little better on the subject somehow and ensure accurate focus and intended composition. It's particularly easier to shoot with the prism when I've got a digital back on the RZ67, as there are a couple of cables dangling from that so using the prism and the tripod together makes it more manageable.
Outside the studio, I normally only use the WLF.
One of my two Blads is a 553ELX I recently got kinda silly cheap. I'll probably just keep the prism on that camera, as it will likely sit on a tripod full time, and use the WLF with the 500CM.
Which is more *fun* to use? The WLF, definitely. It seems to lead to a much more relaxed and spontaneous shooting style. Not only that, with medium format cameras, I've somehow gotten to the point that the reversed field of view with the WLF seems totally natural, and strangely, when I first started using prisms (and even occasionally now, although I'm getting better), it was hard for me to spontaneously turn the camera the way I wanted it with the prism, and it still feels "weirder" than using the WLF somehow.
(Interestingly, in his book 50 Portraits, Gregory Heisler said that a lot of his work in the past was done with an RZ67, with a 45-degree prism. I don't have the book at hand right now, but he said something to the effect that it enabled him to converse more naturally and maintain a better connection with his subject as he wasn't peering straight downward, as he would with a WLF, and his face wasn't totally hidden behind the camera, as it would be with a 90-degree finder. With the 45-degree prism, he could just direct his eyes slightly downward to focus and compose, but he could quickly glance upward again to maintain eye contact with his sitter.)
I've got an RZ67 and a couple of Hasselblads, and I've got both the Mamiya and Hasselblad 45 degree prisms.
If the cameras are on a tripod in the studio, I usually use the prism. That's because in there, I'm normally shooting rather tight, and the prism is not only a little easier to use on a tripod, it allows me to "lock in" a little better on the subject somehow and ensure accurate focus and intended composition. It's particularly easier to shoot with the prism when I've got a digital back on the RZ67, as there are a couple of cables dangling from that so using the prism and the tripod together makes it more manageable.
Outside the studio, I normally only use the WLF.
One of my two Blads is a 553ELX I recently got kinda silly cheap. I'll probably just keep the prism on that camera, as it will likely sit on a tripod full time, and use the WLF with the 500CM.
Which is more *fun* to use? The WLF, definitely. It seems to lead to a much more relaxed and spontaneous shooting style. Not only that, with medium format cameras, I've somehow gotten to the point that the reversed field of view with the WLF seems totally natural, and strangely, when I first started using prisms (and even occasionally now, although I'm getting better), it was hard for me to spontaneously turn the camera the way I wanted it with the prism, and it still feels "weirder" than using the WLF somehow.
(Interestingly, in his book 50 Portraits, Gregory Heisler said that a lot of his work in the past was done with an RZ67, with a 45-degree prism. I don't have the book at hand right now, but he said something to the effect that it enabled him to converse more naturally and maintain a better connection with his subject as he wasn't peering straight downward, as he would with a WLF, and his face wasn't totally hidden behind the camera, as it would be with a 90-degree finder. With the 45-degree prism, he could just direct his eyes slightly downward to focus and compose, but he could quickly glance upward again to maintain eye contact with his sitter.)
littleearth
Well-known
Very random question ! With 6x6 a WLF works great, but on a 645 or 6x7 it's pretty cumbersome to use. Also obviously depends on what you're shooting !
unixrevolution
Well-known
I use my 6x7 with its metered TTL prism finder when i'm using it handheld. When I'm using it on a Tripod for landscapes or portraits and using a flash-meter or spotmeter for exposure, I use the TTL finder.
There are use cases for both. When it has the prism finder it's like a giant K1000. When it has the WLF it's almost like a view camera
Huss
Mentor
I use the prism if I have the motor grip attached to my Mamiya 645 Pro TL. WLF if using the hand crank. Or if on a tripod. Or if I just feel like doing that that day..
BlackXList
Well-known
Prism for me, because it makes it behave like my 35mm slrs.
The reversed image throws me off for a moment every so often, I adjust of course, but it's enough to interrupt a working flow.
The reversed image throws me off for a moment every so often, I adjust of course, but it's enough to interrupt a working flow.
Nokton48
Mentor
Actually, neither Prism nor Waist Level.
I much prefer the "stovepipe" viewfinder.
Here I made one for my Plaubel Makiflex, out of an old Mamiya RB-67 Metering Pipe, I bought for practically nothing. The Mamiya Ocular is fantastic on the Makiflex.
001 by Nokton48, on Flickr
Same for Hasselblads. Hassy Stovepipe Viewfinder.
001 by Nokton48, on Flickr
I much prefer the "stovepipe" viewfinder.
Here I made one for my Plaubel Makiflex, out of an old Mamiya RB-67 Metering Pipe, I bought for practically nothing. The Mamiya Ocular is fantastic on the Makiflex.
001 by Nokton48, on FlickrSame for Hasselblads. Hassy Stovepipe Viewfinder.
001 by Nokton48, on Flickr
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
I just bought another WLF for the Mamiya 645...great deal from KEH in Like New condition...
I would have been interested in a non-metering prism if I could have found one without any silver separation on the prism mirror...the metered prism I have now is in great shape and doesn't have this problem...and in most cases I prefer the WLF...
I would have been interested in a non-metering prism if I could have found one without any silver separation on the prism mirror...the metered prism I have now is in great shape and doesn't have this problem...and in most cases I prefer the WLF...