Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,589   Posts: 1,545,915   Online: 1213
      
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678
Results 71 to 75 of 75

Thread: 500 c/m vs. RB

  1. #71
    erikg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    pawtucket rhode island usa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,409
    Quote Originally Posted by schewct View Post
    I would personally prefer the 500 c/m. Nothing beats the blad. Enough said.
    Enough said? I think this thread proves otherwise. I'd pass on the RB, go for an RZ, unless I want to forgo the tripod, then I would go with a 501. A fuji rangefinder is even better in that regard. It all comes down to personal preference.

  2. #72
    Tony-S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    719
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by jglass View Post
    I LOVE the 6x7 ratio and want to mark the Hass focusing screen for that ratio to crop at the time of composition. Any suggestions on exactly how to do that? I've had a hard time finding methods that seemed practical. Seems like there should be an easy solution, but have not found it. Any suggestions from you experts?
    The 6x6 format is evolutionary baggage from the beginning of the TLR days when it was typically cropped to 6x4.5. Not that it can't be compositionally useful, but the 6x7 format is more flexible.

  3. #73
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony-S View Post
    The 6x6 format is evolutionary baggage from the beginning of the TLR days when it was typically cropped to 6x4.5. Not that it can't be compositionally useful, but the 6x7 format is more flexible.
    And requires a lot bigger camera.

    There's something to be said for square. It's big enough, especially with today's films, to crop at will to a rectangle without having to rotate the camera or the back, essential for TLRs and handy for MF SLRs with waist level finders. The trade off is wasting a bit of film compared to a 645 camera. Of course I have some images I composed and shot square and like that way, but you can just as easily crop the 6x7 back to 6x6 when you want square.

    I have both 6x6 and 6x4.5 cameras (TLR and SLR respectively.) I will happily use either handheld. Having handled an RB, while you CAN shoot some with it handheld, it's just not a practical walking around camera. If you want that in 6x7 get a Pentax or a Mamiya 7 (and be prepared to pay for the latter.) Or possibly one of the Fuji RFs if interchangeable lenses are not a must. The Pentax is more workable handheld than the RB but you give up interchangeable backs and the rotating back, and it's still bigger and heavier than the Hassleblad.

    I come right back to what I said before - if one is ONLY going to use it on a tripod, get the RB. If it's going to be used handheld, even occasionally and especially while moving from place to place like walking down the street or around at an event, get the Hassleblad (or something else, but not an RB.)

  4. #74
    Tony-S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    719
    Images
    14
    By the time you crop a 6x6 down to the same aspect ratio of 6x7 you have more than 50% more surface area with a 6x7 frame. My GS-1 isn't all that much bigger than my Rolleiflex SLX. Probably why the Rollei is rarely used.

  5. #75
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,894
    That's true, but does it matter? It depends on your final print size, your film and developer, and your tolerance for grain. I happily print up to 16x20 from my 645 negs, or 6x6 cropped to 645. The bigger negative would primarily be an advantage to me for cropping further for composition or to make up for a lens a bit shorter than I would have preferred.

    If you print larger, use film that's grainier, or are averse to any visible grain at all then it starts to matter more. I can certainly see the difference between 645 and 6x7 on a 16x20 from fast film, at least if viewed fairly close. More commonly I print 11x14 and at that size the difference becomes very small.

    I totally understand the appeal of the lack of grain and smooth tonality of a larger negative enlarged less - I do shoot 4x5. I'm not familiar with the GS, at least in person (never seen one IRL.) The RB is just bigger and heavier than I, or many people, want to carry and use handheld so if the choice is between the RB and Hassleblad it comes down to that. Now if I'm going to use it on a tripod all the time, I'd take the RB hands down for that bigger negative. I'm not a believer in the church of Zeiss or any other magic lens make. Good lenses, yes, special magic in certain brands, no. Mamiya glass is excellent.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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