Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,836   Posts: 1,582,411   Online: 928

Blog Comments

  1. TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    The pictures were great and I enjoyed the show.
  2. colrehogan's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    A lady at work who I showed the View Camera article to said she had been to the place where your shot was taken, Scott. She used to live nearby, I think.
  3. liquid695's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    good!!
  4. wildbillbugman's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    I am like a Black Hole. Whatever stuff ( vast quantities) comes in never leaves. I am adicted to photographic gadgets.
    Bill
  5. colrehogan's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    My husband wishes that I would "unload" all of my photography stuff.
  6. keithwms's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    Ian, actually, what you describe agrees surprisingly well with what I said.

    Obviously my factors are going to work better when the formats are closer together and the two film speeds that you are comparing are in the middle ISO range, say 100 to 800 or so.

    Moreover, as I said in the blog, "a linear relationship .. will certainly fail at ISO extremes." APX 25 is an ISO extreme... what 4x5" 400 speed APX film can we even compare it to, fairly?? So we wind up comparing it to hp5+, tmax, delta 400, etc. Then it's all apples and oranges.

    Anyway, that said, let's see just how "way off mark" my estimates are. Atcually I don't think it's so bad as you imply:

    APX25 ->APX100 = 2 stop increase
    6x9 -> 4x5 = 1 format jump
    so my simple theory is off by maybe 1 stop? Pretty good, no?

    As for 400 speed 5x4 being well ahead of any 35mm film, sure but again I don't think I am that far off at all, considering the size of the jump. The ratio of the area of 5x4 and 35mm films is roughly fifteen. That is huge. So that implies something like 4-stop difference on the ISO scale, i.e. ISO 400 4x5 = approximately ISO 25 in 35mm format. Again that is placing the 35mm film right on the ragged edge of what is technically possible. Realistically, to get the very best out of the ISO 25 films in 35mm format requires some special development. So, some nonlinearity doesn't surprise me at all.

    Anyway.. like I said.. simple theory based on one simple assertion about amplification of noise, just to give some ballpark ideas! The idea was to give people an idea of what a format jump really does for them, in terms of detail per grain.
  7. Ian Grant's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    I think your factors are way off mark. From experience APX25 in a 6x9 back was equivalent to 5x4 APX100, and 400 ISO 5x4 is ahead of any 35mm film, even of 25 ISO.

    Ian
  8. Valerie's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    Congratulations, Scott. Can't wait to see the picts!
  9. keithwms's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    When is opening night for you guys, Scott?
  10. sidearm613's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    I actually have a Canonet QL17, but the light seals are screwed up at the moment. Gotta get around to fixing those so I may reenter rangefinder land.


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin