Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/08/10

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: 35mm vs. MF
From: "Garbutt, Robert" <RGarbutt@ncrpexec.telstra.com.au>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 16:07:00 +1000

Joe,

Depending on one's budget for things experimental, and the desired
application, your advice bears out my experience.   The great advantage
of folding cameras is that for stable light conditions everything can be
preset and ready to go.  Flip, click, wind . . .  and walk on.  There is
no lens cap but everything is protected.  There is no case to carry.
They do provide a great sense of freedom and are lots of fun.  No mirror
and light weight so hand holding  is a breeze.   With practice you can
even leave the light meter at home.

120 cameras which fit in your back pocket are great for intimacy but for
big enlargements they do have their limits.  Still, sometimes when the
gods smile the results are surprisingly good.   And sometimes the
intimacy of these cameras wins over having a Howitzer aimed towards a
subject no matter what the lens quality.    In the city especially a
Nettar will blend in where my FM2 just says 'look at me and my big
lens'.

The great advantage of folding 120 cameras (especially the **Nettar**)
is that they are cheap and provide an easy entry into 6X6.  You can
check out whether a square format works for you, get experience
processing and printing 120 film, and flame your desire for more or
decide to give it away  - a lot of the unasked and unanswerable
questions a photographer has can be sorted out without a hasseload of
money.

Haven't tried the Super Ikonta but would love to.   They are quite
expensive in Australia - anyone got one for sale?

I now solemnly promise never to mention the Nettar on this list again.
It is off-topic and rude.

Regards,
Rob.
 ----------
 >  From: Joe Berenbaum
 >  To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
 >  Subject: Re: 35mm vs. MF
 >  Date: Sunday, 10 August 1997 9:30AM
 >
 >
 >  At 15:02 09/08/97 -0700, you wrote:
 >  >     Ted,
 >  >     Thanks for your honest view on the matter of 35mm vs MF format
in the
 >  >     . . .
 >  >     and more time required to capture images.  I am just trying to
figure
 >  >     out what is the best combination of equipment to achieve
"quality"
 >  >     prints without the hassle factor of MF or large format gear.
It
 >  >     appears Leica is the answer with the great performance,
especially at
 >  >     . . .
 >  >     Any other thoughts out there on my ramblings?
 >  >     Ken
 >
 >  Just one observation; there are folding MF cameras to be found that
give
 >  negatives of 6 x 4.5, 6 x 6, or 6 x 9 sizes; these can have coupled
 >  . . . .
 >  rangefinders and coated Tessar or Tessar clone lenses. Some later
square
 >  who doesn't mind a standard lens, such a camera might be worth
considering.
 >  The film could all go in the same pocket as the Sekonic L308B.
 >
 >  Joe Berenbaum
 >