Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,991   Posts: 1,524,210   Online: 1150
      
Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 85
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    3,242
    A Linhof Press 70 with 53 Biogon, 80and 100mm Planars and 180mm Sonnar would work very nicely. It will not going to be easy to find this equipment. There are also Schneider lenses available for the camera.
    Claire (Ms Anne Thrope is in the darkroom)

  2. #22
    AutumnJazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Fairfield, Connecticut
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    730
    You don't wish to walk around with the RZ67?



    (I'm trying to convince myself that I can spend all day with 10 lbs. over my shoulder.)

    I went to B&H recently, trying to find the MF camera for me...and my top two were the RZ67 and 7II.

  3. #23
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    The factors that will contribute most to sharpness are: 1. a fast lens, to allow faster shutter speeds, 2. lack of a flipping mirror, to make the camera less shaky, 3. eye level vs. waist level shooting, and 4. film selection. The faster the better, to allow faster shutter speeds.

    I would pretty much totally ignore the technical specs of the lenses, as they are all good, and focus more on final results. Just to make up an example, Hassy might make a "better" normal lens than the one for Mamiya 7, but the fact that the Hassy is an SLR might negate this advantage for hand-held use.

    With this in mind, I would say you should start looking at cameras that are not SLRs. TLRs, Mamiya 7s, Mamiya Press, Graflex and Linhof press cameras, etc.

    TLRs will have some of the fastest lenses of the lot, give you a mirror for *perfect focusing accuracy* and very good compositional accuracy, unlike a rangefinder, and give you the advantage of waist or chest level shooting, which is very stable compared to eye level shooting with the Mamiya 7, Press, etc.

    This has nothing to do with why I made my above comments, but my work has a user Rolleicord IId in (75mm f/3.5 Schneider Xenar lens) that we are going to E-Bay. I think it is early 1950s vintage. It fires at all speeds, and they sound close enough to use, although the shutter cocking lever seems a bit mushy and the shutter speed and aperture control levers are stiff. I would CLA it, but it works, is a user, and will likely go for peanuts when we auction it. (I am thinking $40 or so.) If you are interested, let me know via PM and I'll send you the link when we EBay it. Would love to sell directly on APUG, but I don't personally have the authority to do that.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 08-27-2008 at 06:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  4. #24
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,134
    Quote Originally Posted by emanded View Post
    Any views on the sharpest hand held MF set up?
    I have an Xpan which I use for 35mm - very sharp. I also have a Mamiya RZ system that I use for tripod work. What I'm looking for is something to fill the gap as I sometimes need to print 12x16 or above and the 35mm loses a little when enlarged over this size - especially if the frame is cropped.
    I need to be able to take it anywhere and use mostly hand held.
    The sharpest one would be the one easiest to hold steady and hold the film the flattest. So, it would be heavy, it would have a leaf shutter and perhaps a wide angle lens and an electronic shutter release and use either a vacuum film back (for roll film) or have a sheet film holder.
    Last edited by ic-racer; 08-27-2008 at 06:11 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arlington, Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    467
    Sharpest? There are several that are sharp enough!

  6. #26
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Indeed. "Sharp enough" should definitely be the goal of the quest as opposed to "sharpest".

    For one thing, as I touched on above, "sharpest" will have more to do with technique and the specifics of the shot than it will have to do with the specifics of the lenses in lab tests. Some people will be able to get a sharper shot with a "worse" lens than someone else could get with a "better" lens.

    However, as far as bang for the buck in terms of quality, do yourself a favor and check out how cheap some very fine old cameras are going for. "Sharpest", "sharp enough", and "cheaper than dirt" might even all be attainable with the same camera. Old user Rolleis and several other cameras aren't that much more than a new tricked-out Holga.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    218
    By reputation, I mention the Kodak Medalist rangefinders.

  8. #28
    Andrew Moxom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Keeping the British end up in Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,868
    Images
    333
    Mamiya 6 by a large mile!
    Please check out my website www.amoxomphotography.com and APUG Portfolio .....

  9. #29
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,103
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by AutumnJazz View Post
    You don't wish to walk around with the RZ67?



    (I'm trying to convince myself that I can spend all day with 10 lbs. over my shoulder.)

    I went to B&H recently, trying to find the MF camera for me...and my top two were the RZ67 and 7II.
    10 lbs.?

    If you are carrying 10 lbs., even with an RZ67, you are carrying a big kit - lots of lenses and accessories.

    No matter what system you choose, if you carry a big kit, it will be heavy (Pentax 110 SLR excluded ).

    Instead, you should be looking at how light a portable kit can be.

    RZ67s are bulky, but when you consider how the built in bellows allows for smaller and lighter lenses, and how the rotating back makes prism finders less important, you may find that a travel kit is more compact than you might think.

    To give you an example, I have used a Mamiya C330 for years. I used to shoot weddings with it, carrying three lenses and using a prism finder. With one lens, it is comparatively big and heavy. With two lenses (e.g. a 65mm and 135mm) the kit isn't much bigger, but much more flexible. With three lenses (55mm, 80mm and 135mm), again not much bigger, but very flexible.

    The prism finder is important for weddings and other environmental work, but otherwise can be omitted.

    I have a left hand trigger grip for my C330 that also works with an RB67. I don't know if it will fit the RZ67.

    I find the grip plus the C330 to be very hand-holdable. I've tried the RB67 with that grip, and it isn't that much heavier.

    By the way, I do own a Koni-Omega Rapid M with 58mm and 90mm lens. It too is large and fairly heavy. I got it to get into 6x7, and I like it, but there are issues with the film transport/backs that I have that I am not particularly happy about. If I was looking for my first MF camera, it probably wouldn't be my first choice.

    I think you should consider the RB67 or RZ67, if you find that you like it. Essentially, I'm saying go with your gut.

    I would lean toward a later model of the RB67, because the investment is lower, so once you become fully cognizant of how well or poorly it works for you, you can make a decision whether or not to keep it, and if your decision is that you don't want to, you can most likely get most of your money back.

    Hope this doesn't meander too much, and is of some help.

    Matt

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    I have used RZs, Bronica 6x6, TLRs etc and my view is:

    MF RF every time. No mirror slap improves slow speed sharpness a lot...lighter....better ergonomically etc There is just no way you can generate the same smoothness from an SLR without the mirror locked up, which i not possible hand held.

    The Mamiya 7 produces the sharpest negatives I have ever seen. Put Delta 100 in and develop with FX-39 for a staggeringly sharp neg. Mamiya 6 is supposed to be similarly sharp although the collapsible mount on that version might introduce some reductions in resolution at wide apertures. The Bronica RF645 is pretty darned close is not right there with it, but the neg is of course smaller. Both whip the late model Bronica SQ series lenses I once owned, although these ares still very good.

    The idea of a mirror and GG viewing on a TLR giving improved sharpness is flawed. mirror alignment can vary and must be perfect as must a rangefinder. Besides, the RF system provides better focus accuracy with shorter FLs. TLRs can also become misaligned from a clonk (due to the moving lens platform, just as an RF can be...only adjusting the RF is no bother!



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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