Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,390   Posts: 1,683,294   Online: 640
      
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 378910111213
Results 121 to 130 of 130
  1. #121

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,300
    a 24x36mm frame is a little more than 10mm shorter than a 42x56mm frame, sprocket holes don't count.

  2. #122
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,102
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by hpulley View Post
    Getting back to sports, many people seem to forget that there were sports and photographers taking pictures of the players before the '70s when the spray and pray film bodies and 250 shot film backs started to appear.
    I remember using manual advance and manual focus to shoot at the drags and coming home with plenty of good stuff.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  3. #123
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    That is your situation, which is well covered by my exception, and which you seem intent on projecting onto all of us as a general statement of fact. Instead of blankly stating that that is just the way it is because that is the way it is for you, why not just say that that is the way it is for you? I can get get dip-n-dunked, proofed, and even scanned film of any type back in four hours here, but I don't go around trying to tell everyone that film results are only a four hour turnaround because that is my situation.

    Additionally, I will reassert that the only one of your criteria that causes you to choose digital is the turnaround time in your neck of the woods. All the other stuff ("speed, fast AF, flash control") is more than available with many film cameras.

    I am not disagreeing with your choice to shoot digital for quick turnaround in your situation – just your opinion that this argument holds for everyone to the point that we might as well shoot digital if we want to shoot 35mm.
    Chill. Your reality may differ; I'm simply reporting mine, OK? What's up with the Grand Inquisitor tone, anyway? I refuse to pay for crap 35mm C-41 processing and printing. I'm all but done with it. MF is where my time, money and energy goes now. Think you're wide of the mark taking this as a digital-vs-analog pissing contest.

  4. #124
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,253
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by heespharm;1140460In my [I
    personal[/I] view there isn't much difference between 35mm and 6x4.5... It's a 1cm or 10mm height difference which is about a 20% difference where I feel I can use slower films and proper processing to make up that difference

    35mm Vs 6x7 is almost 1.8 or double the size... Now that's a difference... No amount of processing in my ability or film speed could make up for that large of a difference

    Just my 2 cents
    FWIW:

    A 135 negative is 24x36mm = 864 square mm

    A 6x4.5 negative is 42x56mm = 2352 square mm

    A 6x7 negative is 56x69.5mm = 3892 square mm.

    So the ratios are:

    a) 6x4.5 is 2.72 times the size of 135;
    b) 6x7 is 4.50 times the size of 135; and
    c) 6x7 is 1.65 times the size of 6x4.5.

    All medium format sizes are taken from the manuals for Mamiya equipment.
    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

  5. #125

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    529
    hahah oh yeah... forgot about them sprockets... what if your shooting the sprockets??? meh your completely correct! ;-P

  6. #126

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    529
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    FWIW:

    A 135 negative is 24x36mm = 864 square mm

    A 6x4.5 negative is 42x56mm = 2352 square mm

    A 6x7 negative is 56x69.5mm = 3892 square mm.

    So the ratios are:

    a) 6x4.5 is 2.72 times the size of 135;
    b) 6x7 is 4.50 times the size of 135; and
    c) 6x7 is 1.65 times the size of 6x4.5.

    All medium format sizes are taken from the manuals for Mamiya equipment.
    woah nice math... yeah ur correct... I was only considering height of frame.. but if you talking surface area there's a load of difference!!!..

  7. #127

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ajman - U.A.E.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    965
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    FWIW:

    A 135 negative is 24x36mm = 864 square mm

    A 6x4.5 negative is 42x56mm = 2352 square mm

    A 6x7 negative is 56x69.5mm = 3892 square mm.

    So the ratios are:

    a) 6x4.5 is 2.72 times the size of 135;
    b) 6x7 is 4.50 times the size of 135; and
    c) 6x7 is 1.65 times the size of 6x4.5.

    All medium format sizes are taken from the manuals for Mamiya equipment.
    How about those math compared to large formats [4x5 and larger]?

  8. #128
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,860
    Quote Originally Posted by heespharm View Post
    woah nice math... yeah ur correct... I was only considering height of frame.. but if you talking surface area there's a load of difference!!!..
    Yeah, and though 135 is about 20% smaller than 645 in each linear dimension, 645 is about 75% taller and about 50% wider than 135 in each linear dimension!
    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.

  9. #129

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    529
    4x5 or 20 inches squared equals about 12900mm squared = roughly 15 times the resolution!!!!

  10. #130

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ajman - U.A.E.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    965
    135 was looked a bit small to MF, now when i get LF i see that MF is small to LF, i don't want to imagine what about 8x10 to 4x5 or 20x24 to 8x10.

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 378910111213


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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