Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

   


   


   















      :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: film and scanning vs digital photography



From: "R. Jackson" <jackson.robert.r@comcast.net>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So IQ is vital to you unless it isn't. Heh...I guess we could go on
for a couple of days with me saying that 645 isn't a serious format
and you can choose to use an inferior format if it suits your needs,
but that doesn't make it worth using. ;-)
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Exactly! But I ain't telling you that 645 is better than 6x7. Only that it's
cheaper, lighter, easier to use, and meets requirements. Tell me that about
the 4/3 cameras and you don't get an argument. But blame "digital" for 4/3's
problems, tell me that it does something better, and you get an argument.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And FWIW, a medium format SLR is only useful, IMO, if you lock up the
mirror. When you start moving big mirrors like that around it defeats
the purpose of using a larger format. I tried out a couple of Pentax
67s at camera shows and releasing the shutter was like tripping a
mouse trap.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<

That's true of the P67, but the M645 delivers the goods at 1/125 handheld.
About one in three images fail at 1/60. According to both my microscopes and
Nikon 8000. I've seen people using P67s handheld, but that's outdoors on
bright sunny days.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 The Mamiya is really well-behaved, IMO. I can live
without it being an SLR in exchange for not having a bid sheet of
glass swinging wildly to and fro inside the body.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

The M7 doesn't get close (without going to heroic efforts), polarizers are a
pain, it doesn't really do portraits. It's a two-trick pony (43 and 65
(three if you like 80mm)), but the 43 is expensive enough that it never
showed up here (oops: for 1/2 the money I could have had the GSW690III with
full 6x9, but the lack of interchangeable lenses put me off). And I'm not
convinced the M7 is any better on the shutter speed than the M645. If I need
1/60 or slower with either of them, the tripod gets used. People insist
rangefinders work handheld, but that's a lot of film and a lot of lens to
waste.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I've actually been thinking about picking up a Fuji GX-680 III. Being
able to change off between 120 and a digital back plus having view
camera movements (although somewhat limited) makes a pretty strong
argument for owing one, but every time I pick one up at a camera show
the sheer bulk of it scares me away. It's a lot cheaper option than
the SInar M route, though.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

HEADS UP! The GX-680 III doesn't have movements; you need the GX-680 IIIS.

I was looking at old TLRs on the lowest shelf of a glass case on the dusty
second floor of a used camera shop here in Tokyo, and when I stood up and
turned around, there was a Fuji GX-680 on the top shelf of the case behind
me ready to pounce. I practically had a heart attack; that guy's enormous.

David J. Littleboy
davidjl@gol.com
Tokyo, Japan


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.