I went today. I compared an RZ67, Hasselblad 530c/x (or whatever), and a Mamiya 7. I absolutely LOVED the RZ67...but it is just way too heavy for me...I just cannot walk around with that thing.
I'm warry of manual focus anyway...I mean, I learned on it...but my favorite "genre" is street photography, and that is just so fast. I'm afraid that all of my shots are going to be crappy and blurry.
I did really like the Mamiya 7, though. Very light, ergonimic, and unassuming (for a MF camera, at least).
Before you dismiss manual focus fro street photography, consider that the master of the genere did it with a leica. To convince yourself that you don't need or even want autofocus, mount up a 28mm manual focus lens lens on a 35mm body. Load it wth a roll of HP-5+. Use aperture priority auto exposuse and on a sunny day, set the aperture to f/11 or f/16 and set the focus to the hyperfocal point on the lens. Now, just go out and shoot on the street. Don't even touch the focus ring. Try shooting from the hip - just kinda point the camera in the right direction with out even looking through the veiwfinder....see what you get. I guarantee it'll be much more interesting than anything you can do with any autofocus, auto-everything camera.
__________________ It's just the normal noises in here...
I know that it is easily possible with manual focus, I simply feel that I am not good enough with autofocus to do it.
I also feel that it is easier to auto focus with my K1000 than with my F100...Maybe the K1000 is brighter.
Also, I'm a sucker for really large aperatures and blurry backgrounds with closeups...Although I do like wide expansive scenes filled with people interacting with a sharp environment...I don't know. Environmental portraits vs. street photography, I guess.
(I recently saw a video linked from here with someone [Bruce something-or-other] with a Leica, who would throw it up in people's faces to get pictures. For some reason, I remember nearly perfect focus...Was he like Weegee [known set focus], or did he just use a small aperature?)
I'm really upset about the RZ67, though. The viewfinder was beautiful, the image was sharp, I loved the way it handeled, the rotating back, the way it focused...It was just way, way, way too heavy for me to carry around all day. Maybe I should just bit the bullet and get a good workout, lol.
Edit: I really, really, really cannot stop thinking about the RZ67. I seriously think I may suck it up and carry it around with me. I don't know. I think I'll spend a weekend walking around with a 10lbs. brick around my neck. (5 lbs. camera + 2 lbs. AE prism + 1lbs. motor winder [I'm lazy in that respect] + 2 lbs. lens)
I wish I could pick up and fondle a Bronica, though. I couldn't make it down to Kurland, and B&H had no Bronicas or Rolleis.
The RZ67 just felt so perfect in my hands, aside from the weight. Obviously, if it left this kind of impression on me I should at least consider it.
I did like the Mamiya 7, too...I just don't like the idea of an RF. It seemed pretty akward to me when I used it. It did look amazing, as the Mamiya did. The 'blad didn't leave much of an impression on me, it felt pretty average.
Well, I mean...When I popped open that viewfinder, the image just popped and looked beautiful...not at all like the 'blad. It just felt better in my hands, even though it weighs so much. The image just popped, and looked beautiful.
Still the difference between a 8x10 made from a 6x7 negative and a 10.3x12.8 made from that same 6x7 negative.
Now go to your darkroom, and make both prints, run back to your desk, turn on the high wattage desklight, break out the loupe, and start looking for the difference in quality.
Then sit back and wonder what all the fuzz was about.
Just because you don't print larger than 8x10 doesn't mean that others don't. I print 16x20 and 20x24 exclusively, and I can clearly see the difference in detail between 6x4.5 and 6x7. Just because you can't see the difference, do you seriously believe that no one else on the planet can see the difference?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q.G.
Indeed. Your personal opinion, against absolute indisputable fact...
I understand that in your mind you actually believe that there is no difference in image quality between 6x4.5 negs and 6x7 negs, but that's your personal opinion, NOT an absolute indisputable fact. Do you believe that anyone who says they can see a difference is full of crap, and you are the all knowing one who cannot possibly be wrong?
Just because you don't print larger than 8x10 doesn't mean that others don't. I print 16x20 and 20x24 exclusively, and I can clearly see the difference in detail between 6x4.5 and 6x7. Just because you can't see the difference, do you seriously believe that no one else on the planet can see the difference?
Why do you think i don't print larger than 8x10?
More importantly: why do you think that the difference scales extra-proportionally, i.e. that print size matters?
And why do you think that saying that you print exclusively to medium sizes like 20x24 would make your claim more credible?
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_ebb
I understand that in your mind you actually believe that there is no difference in image quality between 6x4.5 negs and 6x7 negs, but that's your personal opinion, NOT an absolute indisputable fact. Do you believe that anyone who says they can see a difference is full of crap, and you are the all knowing one who cannot possibly be wrong?
I have the distinct feeling that you do not understand at all, are rather fighting your own particular windmills.
Why are you so aggressively protesting an undisputable and huge superiority of a format that's only (yes: only!) 1.29x larger?
Stop that, and instead do run to your darkroom, and make those 8x10 and 10.3x12.8 prints, "run back to your desk, turn on the high wattage desklight, break out the loupe, and start looking for the difference in quality.
Then sit back and wonder what all the fuzz was about."
I know it to be an undisputable fact that you haven't.
And why do you think that saying that you print exclusively to medium sizes like 20x24 would make your claim more credible?
I didn't say anything about credibility. Those are your own words. I said that is the size that I can see a difference in image quality between 6x7 and 6x4.5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q.G.
Why are you so aggressively protesting an undisputable and huge superiority of a format that's only (yes: only!) 1.29x larger?
Do you have some problem comprehending the English language? I DID NOT say "huge superiority", AND I never said that the superiority is indisputable. You stated that the difference in image size "DOES NOT SHOW" (as if your opinion was absolute indisputable fact). I said that I can see a difference, and that is my experience, nothing more, nothing less. If you don't believe me, I really don't care. Apparently you are the all knowing one who could not possibly be wrong.
What kind of math are you using to come up with 1.29x?
I didn't say anything about credibility. Those are your own words. I said that is the size that I can see a difference in image quality between 6x7 and 6x4.5.
Don't be silly.
You were the one who introduced the "believe"-theme, trying to disqualify opinions, which you so very obviously do not even want to consider, as "absolute indisputable facts", which of course they cannot be.
And you do that to put your own "absolute indisputable facts" forward, thinly veiled as "personal opinion".
Very transparent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_ebb
Do you have some problem comprehending the English language?
None at all.
You do know that comprehension involves more than knowing what words might mean?
Open up your mind, and see the world beyond your personal "absolute indisputable facts". For instance, do go and try the test, have a look, instead of repeating your "absolute indisputable facts" over and over again.
Have a look, instead of doing silly sums.
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_ebb
I DID NOT say "huge superiority", AND I never said that the superiority is indisputable.
It's the vocabulary you introduced and i - obligingly - adopted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_ebb
You stated that the difference in image size "DOES NOT SHOW" (as if your opinion was absolute indisputable fact).
I indeed said that.
But the "as if"-bit originates in your mind.
What's the beef you have with anything that is not 6x7?
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_ebb
I said that I can see a difference, and that is my experience, nothing more, nothing less. If you don't believe me, I really don't care.
Hence the silly tries to support your "experience" (what happened to "opinion"? Back to "absolute indisputable facts" again?) with suggesting i never made a print larger than 8x10 (silly), suggesting that it makes a difference whether you have done that or not (not understanding it doesn't matter one iota), and pointing out how large your prints are (very impressive! is it?).
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_ebb
Apparently you are the all knowing one who could not possibly be wrong.
"Apparently" you do not even want to consider the fact that a linear magnification of 1.3 is not very much at all.
Hence your "absolute indisputable facts"/"the all knowing one" stupidity.
Max, have you made and examined both prints as suggested? I am indeed positive that you have not.
You do not need to, do you? You already know that you do not need to, don't you. You "all knowing one".
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_ebb
What kind of math are you using to come up with 1.29x?
Very elementary math. Why do you need to ask???
Quote:
Originally Posted by max_ebb
6 x 7 = 42 sq cm
6 x 4.5 = 27 sq cm
42 = 27 x 1.555...
42 does not equal 27 x 1.29
42 is 55.555% larger than 27
I'll explain so you too understand (and cannot hide behind silly figures):
72 / 56 = 1.285
Enlarge an 6x6 by that factor and you have an image measuring 72 x 72 mm: not 6x7 but 7x7.
And again: print size does not matter, the factor is always the same.
The difference in quality between a print made from 6x6 and 6x7 is that between an, say, 8x10 print made from a 6x7 negative, and a 10.3x12.8 print made from the very same 6x7 negative.
Maybe I should just bit the bullet and get a good workout, lol.
Linear Mode
