Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,842   Posts: 1,582,636   Online: 1047
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 39 of 39
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North America just north of that sharp right turn North America makes on the Atlantic coast.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    602
    I didn't see anyone mention that with Medium Format you can produce contact prints that are large enough to be called photos.
    "Would you like it if someone that painted in oils told you that you were not making portraits because you were using a camera?"
    "Shouldn't it be more about the joy of producing and viewing the photo than what you paid for the camera?"

    Me

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    The Netherlands.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    155
    Images
    5
    I always considered that 8x10 was the limit for a 35mm negative until I took the plunge and made a 16x20 from a 400ISO 35mm negative. I was taken aback - certainly the grain was apparent but the sharpness some how compensated (my opinion). Therefore 35mm in my opinion should not be underestimated, 120 has advantages we all know that but 35mm is no slouch.
    Regards
    Charles

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    North America just north of that sharp right turn North America makes on the Atlantic coast.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    602
    I project my 35mm slides onto a 40" screen and they look fine from a few feet behind the projector. Remember, a huge part of how large you can print a photo is intended viewing distance, remember movies are projected off 35mm film and a movie frame is far smaller than a photo frame.
    "Would you like it if someone that painted in oils told you that you were not making portraits because you were using a camera?"
    "Shouldn't it be more about the joy of producing and viewing the photo than what you paid for the camera?"

    Me

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Dover, NH
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2
    Not being able to afford a full format (approx 35mm) digital SLR, and also a longtime fan of film, I started looking for good deals in MF cameras, RF or SLR.

    I now have two Russion knock-off Hasselblads (6X6). Both take excellect photos that will blow away the output of a digital camera in terms of depths of color and detail. But they aren't the easiest to set-up and there are some rules that must be followed regarding shutter speed settings only after advancing the film, etc.

    My latest acquisition is my prize. It's a Koni-Omega Rapid M. It's in excellent condition and is easy to use (though heavy) and its 6X7 format provides outstanding detail and overall quality.

    My specialities are landscapes, formal portraits, and still lifes. The 6X7 is good for this although the RF design makes precise framing of still lifes a bit difficult.

    I was lucky. The Rapid M is my number one camera now.

  5. #35
    michaelbsc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,106
    Images
    5
    Well, everybody wants sharp, sharp, sharp.

    As Maris pointed out to someone a few years ago, the sharpest lens in your camera bag is the tripod. Certainly it isn't the most convenient to use, but the results speak for themselves even at large enlargement.
    Michael Batchelor
    Industrial Informatics, Inc.
    www.industrialinformatics.com

    The camera catches light. The photographer catches life.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Selah, WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    255
    [QUOTE=steven_e007;1231075]One thing the OP didn't mention was whether he intends to shoot hand held? I presume so, if he specifies a range-finder.

    I find MF outperforms 35 mm on a good tripod, but because the lenses have quite a bit longer focal length for the same angle of view, they can be harder to hold steady hand held.
    QUOTE]

    I found just the opposite was true for me. Nikon F vs C33 with grip and waste level finder. Whether or not it was just the film size and lack of magnification on the prints, I found I could shoot about one stop slower on the C33 with a "normal" lens.

  7. #37
    36cm2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Northeast U.S.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    575
    [QUOTE=Grif;1231182]
    Quote Originally Posted by steven_e007 View Post
    I found just the opposite was true for me. Nikon F vs C33 with grip and waste level finder. Whether or not it was just the film size and lack of magnification on the prints, I found I could shoot about one stop slower on the C33 with a "normal" lens.
    If I'm not mistaken, the C33 is a TLR that uses a leaf shutter system, while the Nikon F is an SLR. The ability to shoot one stop slower on the C33 may be due to the lack of mirror slap vibration experienced with the F, particularly at certain shutter speeds.

    This raises a good point, though. Many variables impact results, including film size, tripod use, camera type (rangefinder, tlr, slr), film type and speed, shutter speed, time available to shoot, speed and convenience of camera use, etc.

    While I love the ease of 35mm, I've relegated it to quick family pics and convenience-driven situations. I use MF for serious work where other people are around and/or involved. I use 4x5 when it's just me, nature and time hanging out. Heck, I'm likely to use 8x10 for that soon if that Chamonix keeps staring at me online.

    Suum cuique (to each his own). Enjoy whatever you're shooting and shoot whatever you enjoy.

    Leo
    "There is a time and place for all things, the difficulty is to use them only in their proper time and places." -- Robert Henri

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Shropshire, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    829
    Images
    7
    [QUOTE=Grif;1231182]
    Quote Originally Posted by steven_e007 View Post
    One thing the OP didn't mention was whether he intends to shoot hand held? I presume so, if he specifies a range-finder.

    I find MF outperforms 35 mm on a good tripod, but because the lenses have quite a bit longer focal length for the same angle of view, they can be harder to hold steady hand held.
    QUOTE]

    I found just the opposite was true for me. Nikon F vs C33 with grip and waste level finder. Whether or not it was just the film size and lack of magnification on the prints, I found I could shoot about one stop slower on the C33 with a "normal" lens.
    Well, yes, actually I've found that true, too, with my C330. The ergonomics of a big chunky waist level TLR and the leaf shutter do help with reducing shake compared with some other cameras - but I was thinking of two similar cameras, if the OP is comparing a 35mm rangefinder with a MF rangefinder, both with similar styles and shutters, the longer focal length of the MF camera is going to mean shake is a bigger problem, I reckon, all else being equal.
    Steve

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA., U.S.A.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    228

    What can I get for around $200 ?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbryld View Post
    I've been looking for a MF RF for a little bit now.
    While there ARE some affordable ones, I can't help
    but think if I should just go for a 35 mm RF.

    If it's hardly (or maybe even not at all), a 35 mm
    RF is definitely the way to go. In that case, what
    can I get for around $200.00 ?
    As I've recently just learned, that the image quality,
    or the ease of use, or advanced features aren't the
    highest priority, but the price is the ONLY THING
    THAT MATTERS, here's what I would suggest,
    since this camera hasn't been mentioned.

    Look for an Olympus XA with an A-16 flash.

    This camera is:

    Aperture Priority, with a Manually set ISO, with a
    +1.5 exposure Backlight switch,

    By having a manually set ISO, you can compensate
    for B&W & Color Negative mislabeled ISO's.
    DX won't allow you to do this.

    Featuring a 35 mm 6 element, ( planar type ),
    f 2.8 lens, the lens can deliver 11 x 14's,
    ( I've done it ),

    A slightly powerful flash with a Leaf Shutter which
    will synch up to the maximum 1/500th sec shutter
    speed, of the camera,

    While the A-16 flash takes only 2 AA batteries, but
    if you use Lithiums it's O.K., but just don't keep
    the batteries in the flash, when you're not using it.

    Also, the flash only has settings for ISO 100 & 400,
    but this can be worked around & is not significant,

    Completely Manual RF split image focusing but with
    a Hyperfocal Focus Setting at f 5.6 @ 5 ft,
    when it's needed, ( and it works, I can tell you ),

    By size will fit in a Large Cell Phone Holster,

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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