|
|
|
-
I am using a Rodenstock Rodagon 4,0/60mm-WA for 35mm and 6x4,5.
For 6x7 I have a Rodenstock Rodagon 4,0/80mm and to be honest I can not see the difference in a 30x40cm print of 6x6 made by the 60mm or 80mm Rodenstock. Maybe when going up to 50x60cm but that comparision I never did.
-
Big formats just look better IMO, even when resolution is no different. I find it takes two stops less speed AND a shift to modern tabular films to match the 6x7 traditional 400 films in technical performance; the ye olde films just look juicier and with more bite at the same print size.
Really it does not matter because circumstances dictate which format is practicable and there is no comparison shot. You either have a great image or you don't.
Last edited by Tom Stanworth; 04-09-2010 at 11:03 AM. Click to view previous post history.
-
The lens you use, the camera you use and the enlarger you use will make no impact when trying to make 35mm look like 6x7 or 4x5. It isn't a matter of sharpness: a pinhole 6x7 will have the look while a 35mm shot taken with the most deified cult lens won't.
The only answer I have found is Technical Pan - it really does give a medium/large format look to a print made from 35mm. I think I have tried every other film in the book and have found anything that works as well. It isn't a matter of grain size or resolution, but I think a matter of being able to resolve detail at very small contrast differences; something no microfilm-based uber-resolution film can do.
TP and Technidol are available on ebay (though at scalpers' prices). If you are looking for the MF/LF I have to recommend using only Technidol for developing, I haven't had much joy with other developers.
-
 Originally Posted by Rol_Lei Nut
If your real life results are good (esp. if the grain in the corners is sharp and vignetting isn't visible), then you're in hog's Heaven! 
I am, I am....
|
|
Adv Reply
