Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,740   Posts: 1,670,463   Online: 662
      
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 75

Thread: WLF vs Prism?

  1. #51

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,245
    hahahahaha alot of people think newer is better, but when you see the guts cheapened over the years, more money going into advertising than product, you really see how powerful marketing was for a sinking company at the time... and it worked just enough to keep em alive.


    Quote Originally Posted by TareqPhoto View Post
    You are reading my mind, i was thinking to do that exactly, but i was not sure how much different in quality between the two and the functionality of both cameras, something inside my head telling me that RZ lenses are better than RB lenses, but i may be wrong.
    Anyone can make a Digital print, but only a photographer can make a photograph.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ajman - U.A.E.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    965
    or maybe Mo... F....., so whatever it stands for, we should keep on topic, hahaha

  3. #53
    Paul Glover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Salem, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    76
    I quite enjoy using the WLF on my Yashica TLR. The lateral reversal doesn't bother me usually, though I'm not trying to follow action with it. There are times where the WLF isn't as practical of course, but then again there are times when an eyelevel finder isn't the best choice either. Like Roger I tend to use it more at chest/neck level. I've also used it turned on its side for eyelevel work, though that gets very disorienting unless I slow down a lot and think everything through, but with more practice, that might get easier. The only other issue is in low light it can get very hard to compose at all, but that's more an issue with the dim screen on this particular camera.

  4. #54
    TheToadMen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Netherlands, Europe
    Shooter
    Pinhole
    Posts
    2,263
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    Great minds ... I had the same thought but I could not come up with a funny way to handle it.
    To keep it in the spirit of APUG: More Film!
    "Have fun and catch that light beam!"
    Bert from Holland
    my blog: http://thetoadmen.blogspot.nl
    my Linkedin pinhole group: http://tinyurl.com/pinholegroup


    * I'm an analogue enthusiast, trying not to fall into the digital abyss.
    * My favorite cameras: Mamiya C330f, Nikon S2, Hasselblad SWC, Leica SL, Leica M7, Russian FKD 18x24, Bronica SQ-B and RF645, Rolleiflex T, Nikon F4s, Olympus Pen FT, Agfa Clack and my pinhole cameras.

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by nwilkins View Post
    However, the main reason I am looking to buy a prism finder is camera height, particularly for portraits. To have the camera at the height of a human head you could just look directly into a prism, but at that height with a WLF you need to stand on something.
    Height is the one reason I will go to a prism. I am using a Rollei 6008, so I get the metering information in the WLF too.

    For portraits, I have been told that the ideal position is to have the camera about midway, not equal, in height. So when the model is standing, I am sitting or kneeling and the camera is approximately equal in height to the model's pelvis or midsection.

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by TheToadMen View Post
    There are a lot of Middle Format (MF) [sic] cameras that don't use Waist Level Finders (WLF), such as Bronica RF645, Pentax 67, etc.
    The Pentax 67 has a WLF.

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    615
    Quote Originally Posted by Troll View Post
    What is his technique?
    Meanwhile, I came to MF with the Pentax 645N system and loved it. Then tried a Rolleiflex and it quickly took over. Yes, I had to get used to the mirror image, but ultimately find the mirror image an advantage, and the WLF a superb plus. Especially if you wear glasses, as I do: I can keep them on with my Rolleiflexes, not with my Pentax.

    I loved it so much that I also acquired a Rolleiflex 6008i, which has a WLF, but with meter and interchangeable lenses. It is heavy, though, but handles quite well. It is not sharper than the Xenotar or Planar 2.8 80mm lenses on the TLR, which are indeeed wonderfully silent. I'm going to offload one TLR only because I need the dosh, and I hope to add to my 6008i, and still have a TLR, but otherwise the TLR rules. (I still use my Pentax 645N with 35mm, 135mm, and 150mm lenses. The Pentax also is ergonomically brilliant, has a built-in diopter, and a future upgrade path to the 645D... But the WLF is still my first choice.)
    We have remarkably similar gear. I also have the Pentax 645 and 6008i. I have a 67II for good measure. I agree with your assessment of these types.

  8. #58
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,019
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by tnabbott View Post
    For portraits, I have been told that the ideal position is to have the camera about midway, not equal, in height. So when the model is standing, I am sitting or kneeling and the camera is approximately equal in height to the model's pelvis or midsection.
    For environmental portraits, this may be correct.

    But it can gives some strange results.

    When younger, I had a very experienced photographer tell me that he wouldn't hire a wedding photographer who didn't at least have a prism finder available.

    If you use a waist level finder, there is a tendency to end up with a "naval eye view of the world" in your photographs of people.

    Which definitely doesn't result in the most flattering view of many wedding guests - including many mothers of the bride!
    Matt

    “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

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    246
    I'm thinking of trying a prism because my eyesight isn't what it used to be. Now I need the cheaters to compose then take them off and flip up the magnifier to ensure focus is right, then flip it back down and wonder where the dogs or grand child moved off to. Since I don't have these issues with the Nikon, I'm wondering if a prism will solve the problem.

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lower Earth
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,957
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    45
    Had a prism on a Rolleiflex once. Great for portraits and fast shooting, but made the camera very top heavy and looked really ugly. On my Rolleicord, I simply swapped out the top WLF for a later one that had a sports finder. That works fine and avoids the weight of a prism housing. Some of the Rolleiflex cameras have a WLF that has a mirror in it so you can push the front in and focus on the mirror that looks down to the focus screen. It gives you an upside down image, but is, again, much lighter than a prism. That's my favorite type of WLF. I should look for one for my Rolleiord. It might fit.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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