Photographer Kyle McDougall says that one question he is always asked is whether to shoot medium format film, such as the 645, is really “worth it” compared to the 35 mm film. In this 11-minute video, he explains why he thinks he is.
Although it is clear that there are no “bad” formats, and everyone is quite capable. What really matters is the type of work you plan to create and the preferences you develop over time.
“If the format you’re working with now is right and it’s working for you, don’t feel like you need to update just because of that,” he says.
That said, he believes 645 is a breakthrough in many 35mm cases. Working with a larger negative means getting finer details, less apparent grain at similar image sizes and softer tones. Side by side, 645 versus 35 mm are noticeably different if you saw the negatives side by side.
645 film also offers a 4: 3 aspect ratio, which many photographers – including McDougall – find particularly visually pleasing. In addition, if you are switching to the 35 mm medium format, it is not much narrower than a 35 mm frame, unlike other medium format film sizes that may be slightly narrower.
McDougall also says that, in his experience, he found that of the medium format cameras, the 645 cameras appear to have the most compact and available cameras that can be found and the options are also more economical than other medium format options.
In summary, McDougall believes that for anyone interested in switching to medium format film from 35mm, the 645 has the most positive points in his opinion. To answer the initial question asked, McDougall basically argues that the answer is yes: for many use cases, especially in landscapes and portraits, it is better than 35 mm for several reasons. Not only has the image quality improved thanks to a much larger negative, but the disadvantages are less severe when compared to other medium-sized sizes.
Do you agree? Why or why not? Let us know in the comments.
To learn more about Kyle McDougall, you can subscribe to his YouTube channel.
(via ISO 1200)