One minor point - some 645 cameras (Bronica, I think) get 16 shots on a roll but the Mamiya 645 gets 15, or at least my Pro does.
Hit rate may be better, maybe not. The metering in the AE Prism finder seems to be spot on, but it depends what you've been shooting. It isn't a matrix meter, not really. It does have spot, averaging, and a mix that works a bit like a primitive matrix mode. It does have exposure memory lock so I meter, lock (partial press on the release) and re-compose and shoot just like I do with my Richoh (can't with the LX which lacks this handy feature.) Focusing will be more critical too so that could be a bit slower. But the prism is fairly bright and it's pretty easy to focus IMO.
I THINK I was paying about $5-$6 a roll in the mid to late 80s. I started doing it myself for about $2 and it seems it was about half to one third the cost.
I didn't get the AE prism, just the metering PD prism, but I don't use AE much in 35mm either and it should be a wash in that respect. I think my hit rate is mostly limited by the psychology of shooting different formats rather than by exposure---you know how one burns 35mm film casually and is a little more careful with MF film, more careful still with sheets, and I don't know how I'll end up handling 645 in practice. Even if I end up spending more per keeper, the extra image real estate seems like it'll be worth it, and I like the 3x4 aspect ratio better than 2x3 for most purposes anyway. Thanks, you shameless enabler. :-)
San Diego, CA, USA
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, they are about the same distance apart.
Don't mention it.
BTW did you get the winder grip? That will tend to make you shoot faster, but it also makes the camera handle better IMO.
On and did I tell you how much I like shooting with my 4x5 Linhof?
I don't know about the RF 645, but the ETR series gets 15. The Pentax 645 gets 16.
Originally Posted by Roger Cole
I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.
The 645 backs for the RB67 get 16.
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Will freelances be able to charge 10% extra on their fees to compensate? All the evidence is that while costs are increasing, fees from stock photography are on a downward curve.
I still do well enough in stock, but that is because I saw what was coming over 15 years ago and created a rare niche. I also rep my own stock, do NOT have it anywhere on the Internet and do not shoot film for stock.
Originally Posted by rolleiman
Stock bieng on the decline has nothing at all to do with the cost of film and everything to do with too many people giving away images, the rat race of digital tools and of course last but not least, the very worst thing to invade the arts and the demand for truly creative works:
Fujifilm Announces Film Price increases
If I could understand the things they ask for with stock I would at least have some up, I'm so clueless...
Originally Posted by PKM-25
The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In 135mm format, Ilford has Fuji beat with the three pack of FP4. For this reason I started shooting some FP4 after seven years. What a great film! I think I gave up on it because back then I was fairly new to developing and printing and I always got blown highlights. While FP4 in 120 may still cost more, I picked up 20 rolls to use once my Acros runs out. Maybe Ilford will make a lesser prices five pack of FP4 in 120 as well. Keeping my fingers crossed.
FP4 is a great film. So is Acros. They look pretty different though. I've settled on FP4+ since Plus-X died but I've been shooting some Acros lately and have to say I really like it.
There isn't enough price difference between these films to make that a deciding factor unless you are shooting a LOT of film and, even then, it will probably get swamped in the "noise" of chemical and paper costs.