Medium format with a Canon 5D

why dont you just crop the picture on the pc afterwards?

Hope this isn’t too flippant, but what would the difference be between this and just cropping in photoshop? Set up a custom action that automatically crops to square or 6×7 from the center and then batch crop all of the pictures from a shoot (no mercy, man…just let the program do the cropping to the whole shoot’s original files; it’ll be just like it was film!). Without a new sensor, which I’m sure would cost a lot to buy and also a lot to install if such a beast exists, you couldn’t get any better resolution with any accessory. If the back screen preview is a problem, and you don’t want to see the full 35mm for your “medium format 5d” just gaff tape some edges on your frame that match your crop action.

You guys don’t frame the shot according to the viewfinder? I guess it is possible to imagine where the square is on a rectangular frame, but personally I think it is easier to have either frame lines or a mask. Canon makes both.


The mask does affect exposure.
They are listed at B&H for $120 for a set of 2. One is for a square and the other is 4×5 ratio.
You would still have to do the cropping in PS, unless there is something in the camera’s vast menu that I have not explored yet that would automatically do it.

It’s called Photoshop. You use the crop tool.

I friend of mine got one of those masks for the mirror to help him frame accordingly the desired proportion, but I must say I find an odd solution.

First why on hearth would you prefer 6×7 instead of 2×3 proportion?

For me there several other reasons to use a 6×7 camera besides the proportion…

One use I know of, not sure if I endorse it though, is for someone like a school portrait photographer whose ultimate product will be an 8×10 print to see that format in the finder. Yea, you’ll still have to crop it later (unless one of these fancy new cameras has some internal function to do this for you.. I wouldn’t put it past them). I imagine that’s exactly the use of the screens Radhanatha linked to.

Now, I don’t know why a desire for 6×7 would require such a screen.. unless someone was dead-set on 6×7” prints like the example above?? I’d fall to the advice an editor of mine gave me.. if you want it black and white (or square, or tilt-shift, or whatever) do it right the first time: Use b+w film, use a 6×6, etc. Thus, if you want 6×7 shoot a real 6×7 camera.. besides, it’ll be the only way to actually have it look like it was shot that way, not cropped.

I have been considering getting a set of these screens for my new 5D. My reasoning is that I frame my shots according to the view finder I am looking through. Otherwise I don’t even see the need for a view finder.Because when I look at the world through a square, I frame it differently than if it were a rectangle, just the same as with a horizontal rectangle versus a vertical one. This is why I usually carry a 6×6 with me as well as my digi. But with the price of my 5D I don’t have much left for 120 film and processing, what to speak of scanning it afterwards. So I was thinking, for $120 I can fake it, sort of. The 5D gives files large enough to afford a bit of cropping. (and as far as I know you still have to manually crop it in the computer) But the screen would give me either framelines or a mask to compose by. And I think that in composition is where these guides come in to play, instead of guessing where the square is roughly, or just shooting (maybe with some tape over the eye piece) and then cookie cutter-ing out shapes afterwards.

And why shoot in a non 2×3 ratio? Well, some people just like different shapes. I love to shoot square. But then again I love a nice panoramic as well. (I may actually just not be able to make up my mind, but that is another post all together). And then like Matt said, if you are printing an 8×10 or 16×20 then the 4×5 framelines would show you what will be cropped. (there is no 6×7 mask as far as I can tell. it is square and 4×5. a 6×7 would be nice too, and maybe 6×4.5 occasionally too.)