[Leica] 35 mm format is best?

[tcharara at mac.com (Tarek Charara)]

Well, I'll have to disagree on that one? Acreage is surely important?  
if and only if you use same quality optics.
I used to shoot the works of artists for catalogs and books with a MF  
Mamiya or a Bronica. 6x7cm.
The revelation came the day an artist asked me to double the shoot  
with 35mm slide he needed for a projection. I used a Leica R and a  
50/2 for that.
When the slides came back in MF and 35mm, it was obvious that the 35mm  
slides were far better than the stuff made with MF. This was not only  
about sharpness or resolution, but also about colour accuracy and  
rendition. The artist believed that the 35mm slides looked better than  
his original paintings. Leica optics were far better than the optics  
of Bronica or Mamiya I had at that time (end of the 80's)?

YMMV

All the best from the south of France!

Tarek

-------------------------------------------------
Tarek Charara
<http://www.tarekcharara.com>

NO ARCHIVE




Le 26 ao?t 10 ? 23:27, Mark Rabiner a ?crit :

> Trust me Jeffery I have long experience with Panatomic x it is my  
> signature
> film.  Panatomic in 35mm does not a Rolleiflex or Hasselblad make.
> I had to prove that well known fact to myself before I started  
> saving up for
> medium format systems.
> The bottom line with film as well as digital capture is always going  
> to be
> Real estate real estate real estate.
> Acreage acreage acreage.
> You can set your little format camera to iso 100 but as an image  
> making tool
> a larger format camera is going to still blow it out of the water on  
> a slew
> of accounts.
> This is not my quirky opinion but the first thing anybody learns  
> when they
> get into photography either in the classroom, in the real world, or  
> reading
> a good photography book. The point in denying that is what? You  
> don't get to
> play with little cameras?
>
> As far as this thread name goes... It is just as poorly thought out  
> as the
> text which was under it.
> 35mm is not "best" and I certainly never implied that and didn't see  
> anybody
> else imply that.
> What is "best" is not crippling yourself with a format smaller than
> necessarily to get the shot done well.
>
> --------------------
> Mark William Rabiner
> Photography
> mark at rabinergroup.com
>
>
>> From: Jefffery Smith <jsmith342 at gmail.com>
>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 09:23:09 -0500
>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] 35 mm format is best?
>>
>> I'm with you on that. If the most important facet is high resolution,
>> Panatomic x might still be on the shelves. And Holga would be a  
>> very bad idea
>> that never materialized.
>>
>> Jeffery
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information