|
6 is for squares, 7 is cool, 7ii is slightly better but probably not worth the difference unless you hate money.
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
I'd love to live in a world where the Fujinon 90mm f/3.5 is considered an inferior lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Helicity posted:1) The resolving power of the GW690 lens is rated lower than a bunch of other lenses, especially the Mamiya's. In practical use, how does this play out? If I try printing A0 @ 300dpi for example, am I going to say "ugh this GW690 isn't cutting it, should have gotten a Mamiya"? You might, if you're shooting test targets. First off, the GW690 shoots a negative about 28% bigger than the Mamiya 7. That's significantly less enlargement that you have to do to get up there. Second: I have a 30x40 Cibachrome print taken from 35mm Kodachrome and it looks fine, though it has a not-unpleasantly-grainy, very distinct "gigantic print from 35mm" feel. Steve McCurry sells a few 40x60 prints (50% larger again than A0) shot from the same and has said he's very happy with them. I know he's said they're scanned on an Imacon, but I suspect there's some digital trickery involved in postprocessing. Would they be better shot on medium format? Ignoring the question of "Could Steve McCurry get those pictures lugging around a camera over twice as big?", almost definitely. You'd get that finer detail and grain structure, subtler color rendition, and all of the other reasons we shoot with this stuff. Between the different lenses, would you have a preference? Sure. That's a personal thing, though, and you're only really going to figure it out through experience, not by looking at charts and ratings. Will you have pictures where you say "Ugh, this would have been better on the Mamiya."? That's quite possible. Will you have pictures where you say "Ugh, this Fuji's completely inadequate, but the Mamiya would've made it worthwhile?" I'll bet you a nice lunch you won't. Cassius Belli fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Aug 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:I'd love to live in a world where the Fujinon 90mm f/3.5 is considered an inferior lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:I'd love to live in a world where the Fujinon 90mm f/3.5 is considered an inferior lens. Well, some of the Mamiyas blow it away in lines/mm charts shot by some guy using some methods I don't know. I just wanted to make sure it was more of a "pixel peeper" issue and something that wouldn't affect me practically: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html I appreciate the replies and get the feeling that the lines/mm discussion film nerds have is similar to crop vs full frame, or 16mp vs 24mp digital shooters have - ultimately pointless in many regards. I'll keep shooting the GW690 until I get something worthy of a poster, and let you guys know how it goes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Well, some of the Mamiyas blow it away in lines/mm charts shot by some guy using some methods I don't know. I just wanted to make sure it was more of a "pixel peeper" issue and something that wouldn't affect me practically: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html the 690's lens is super super sharp. i've been using the system for years and i've never had a problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
TheJeffers posted:Honestly, if it's a problem with the body itself, you should probably just buy another one that works right. KEH pricing on SQ bodies is less than half of their flat-rate body repair quote and about half as much as getting a "minor repair" from Tamron. Yeah, paying for a repair is pretty much out of the question for something cheap like the SQ. Bud posted:You could email Frank Marshman (camerawiz@msn.com), talked to him a bit when I got my S2A. He sent me a whole list of checks to perform, maybe he will walk you through some troubleshooting. I emailed him, thanks! I also just set up an alert for when a GW690 goes up on CL 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
Compared to other MF outfits, I don't think resolution is an inadequacy of the GW690 so much as it an advantage of the Mamiya glass. My only continuing issue with the 690 is that 6x9 is a difficult aspect ratio to work with effectively in medium format, but it comes down to personal preference.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Oh god, I made the mistake of looking into the Mamiya 6/7. 1) The GW690 does have lower resolving power, yes, because it's basically a large format lens on a MF camera. (3.6" image circle). A0 at 300 DPI is 140 Megapixels, this doesn't take into account viewing distances. I have a scanner that resolves that much for 6x9, still doesn't mean I have that much resolution. Maybe a third or fourth depending on film and technique. Slow slide film or BW would give you more. Furthermore, unlike digital cameras, scanners don't resolve all that they say they do. Effectively you're gonna be limited by your film, hand-holding, scanning and printing techniques way way before that. Either way I've held a couple of exhibitions -- largest I ever printed was 16", A2 Size. In a frame glass that's already pretty drat large, and expensive. If you wanna chase absolute resolution you're better off with a D810. (Or Large Format!) 2) Yes, once your 6 is broken it's broken. Because it has electrical parts there is also nothing a 3rd party can do. Look at the prices for a 6 again. More like say even a 2.8F Rolleiflex or Hasselblad 501. Idiocy. The Mamiya 7 is exempt from this because it's one of the very few and rare light and portable 6x7 cameras. (There's only Fuji, Plaubel and The Mamiya). If you want portable without mirror slap get a Rolleiflex, which are still cheaper and also fully repairable. Or, if portability is paramount get one of those older folders. No they won't hold up against a 'flex but they are very light and portable and still perform reasonably well, I had no problems printing the stuff I got from em at A2 size, and none of my visitors or myself noticed. Oh, also as an owner of a 7 let me tell you that you better drat well make sure that the rangefinder is in alignment for *all* the lenses you're gonna use. If not unhappy surprises await. It may also drift slightly due to bumping and weather. Fixing it yourself is possible (I did) having it fixed is $$$. Furthermore I wouldn't call the Mamiya's (all of them) light meter reliable. It's a spot, but not a 1 degree spot, also it's position changes relative to the frame-lines and rangefinder spot which move to adjust for parallax. In the near dark, especially at higher ISO, the meter is useless and gives crazy-land readings. It's somewhat useful if you are aware of it's quirks and use it mostly in good light. 3) The 6 vs 7 is dumb because it's a different format. Like I already elaborated the 7 has few peers, whereas there's tons of alternatives for 6x6 format. (Hassy, Rolleiflex, Autocord, Pentacon, Zeiss Folders, Bronica and probably a shitload I forgot) Build wise they're close to the same anyway with the 7ii adding mostly a multi-exposure function. The 6 has a retractable lens, which is nice, but is also another mechanism that could fail. Personally I prefer cameras that KISS. 4) On a personal note, I haven't seen a lot of pictures from you, how about you shoot a little bit more before throwing money away on cameras that you might or might not use? That said, resale value is of course pretty good with those, unless you time it badly and color negative or slide film has died. Then it's gonna suck if you didn't get the use you wanted. VomitOnLino fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Aug 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Well, some of the Mamiyas blow it away in lines/mm charts shot by some guy using some methods I don't know. I just wanted to make sure it was more of a "pixel peeper" issue and something that wouldn't affect me practically: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html Almost all the usual suspects for MF cameras and lenses are good. There are probably a few bad ones but I doubt you'd be using them anyway, so the whole lp/mm comparison thing doesn't really matter. And what 8th-snype and VomitOnLino is correct too, if you want A0 @ 300dpi, maybe you should look into shooting large format and scanning with a drum scanner, cos your technique is gonna fail you long before you hit the resolving power of lens/film/scanner. I also hope you're only planning to shoot on a tripod with slide film otherwise all your shots will be blur at A0 / 300dpi - which kinda makes me wonder why you want the Mamiya 6 for that since the key advantage of it is hand-holdability. I've had an exhibition where I printed 22x22" squares from a Hasselblad that I shot hand-held. Nothing was truly sharp if you were looking at it nose-close but it doesn't matter once you step back and view it as a whole. alkanphel fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Aug 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
I've printed 20" stuff from my Kowa Six that I scanned on a Canoscan 8400F that I was happy with. Unless you plan on looking at your prints under a loupe or you're sending them off to hang at MOMA, no one's going to care.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
I printed 20x24" with a Pentax 67 and it was a little soft if you looked at it with a loupe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
Nah I get it, you guys are all spot on and I'm stressing myself like an idiot. I have this ugly rear end picture above my couch in a poster frame and I say to my wife "let me put some pictures up there", but she wants a poster sized print. And then I think it'd be cool to have a bigass print of a tornado because I never see anyone shooting MF on a storm. So I went from being a little disappointed with 16-18 MP print sizes on APS-C to being in over my head with MF film, trying to get a giant, perfect image right out of the gate, shooting in really lovely conditions. Shooting digital and stitching hasn't worked well in the past because there can be a lot of motion in the subject matter. Composing, exposing, and focusing on the 690 is a chore when I have 30 seconds before needing to hop back in the car and move, and I don't see much in the way of faster options. I've only shot 3 rolls in 6 months and yet haven't developed any of them because I'm afraid they suck. This quest has really sucked the fun out of photography for me for no rational reason, and I probably need to revisit film/MF when I have more free time, and maybe on a subject that can't easily kill me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
Just develop the film. Worst case you will have pretty good photos.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Nah I get it, you guys are all spot on and I'm stressing myself like an idiot. I have this ugly rear end picture above my couch in a poster frame and I say to my wife "let me put some pictures up there", but she wants a poster sized print. And then I think it'd be cool to have a bigass print of a tornado because I never see anyone shooting MF on a storm. So I went from being a little disappointed with 16-18 MP print sizes on APS-C to being in over my head with MF film, trying to get a giant, perfect image right out of the gate, shooting in really lovely conditions. Shooting digital and stitching hasn't worked well in the past because there can be a lot of motion in the subject matter. Practice is going to make perfect here. Shoot more and more and you won't feel bad about it when the poo poo hits the fan.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
Preset your camera at infinity focus and just guess at the aperture. Nearly any f-stop will get you enough depth of field unless the tornado is within 50 feet of you, which seems an unlikely set of conditions. Use new Portra 400 for maximum exposure latitude. Done.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
i made a 40 inch wide print of this photo and it was totally sharp. the 690 is not going to limit you in a search for resolution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
I have had clients print 16x20s from a loving D100 and they were quite happy with them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
ansel autisms posted:A Gossen Digisix is a good investment if you plan on shooting any meterless cameras at all IMO I impulse bought a Digiflash from KEH, and I was not even remotely drunk. Y'all go ahead and tell me how bad I hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
Very badly. Why the gently caress were you buying stuff on KEH without drinking? Sober, you're just buying a thing you know you want on the internet from a store with a good reputation. Boring. Drunk, you're riding the wild edge of a wave of irresponsible and regretable behaviour!
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:
Exactly... knowing that you ordered it while drunk keeps you guessing for a few weeks until it arrives.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 08:30
|
|
|
Could anyone recommend a comfortable camera backpack suited to carrying a medium format body and a few lenses? It's a Bronica SQ-A, so it's big enough. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Could anyone recommend a comfortable camera backpack suited to carrying a medium format body and a few lenses? It's a Bronica SQ-A, so it's big enough. Thanks! http://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-...camera+backpack I use that
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
i'm enjoying your astia, yond cassius.  Evening Thunderstorm, Salt Lake City by Cameron Mattis, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:Could anyone recommend a comfortable camera backpack suited to carrying a medium format body and a few lenses? It's a Bronica SQ-A, so it's big enough. Thanks! For my SQ-Ai I use this guy: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00009R89T?pc_redir=1408804612&robot_redir=1 I can fit a body with lens and back, two additional lenses and two additional backs, and have enough room in the front pocket for film and a meter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Genderfluid posted:i'm enjoying your astia, yond cassius. That is pretty drat awesome!
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
 fujifilm is discontinuing the gf670.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
Wild EEPROM posted:
you can buy it with a cool different look (and a cool $500+ markup) as the bessa iii. identical except for the paint.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
The paint was blessed by Satan, it's worth it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Got my first roll back from my Mamiya 645 and several of my exposures have bad light leak on the top half. As far as I can tell the shutter is working fine on every speed, and the aperture blades aren't sticky or anything. Any idea what may have caused this?  76600006 by Dingus Falcon, on Flickr  76600007 by Dingus Falcon, on Flickr  76600008 by Dingus Falcon, on Flickr edit: Just saw that the seal near the hinge is almost completely deteriorated... Guessing that is the culprit. Has anyone used one of the replacement kits from US Camera? murp fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Aug 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 01:16
|
|
|
 Little India by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
I bought the larger version of this guy (the $49 one) and it works very nicely. The inner pouches are adjustable, so you'll be able to put whatever you need in there. I took it on a trip last week with my dslr and my 35mm, plus lenses, filters and film and was fine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 14:17
|
|
|
Genderfluid posted:i'm enjoying your astia, yond cassius. I'm happy to hear that! That really is a fantastic shot. I like particularly how it managed to catch just a little bit of structure on the ground. I don't think I would have expected that, but as I said before, Astia likes to keep some pleasant surprises up its sleeves. fake edit: Man, I'm looking at this at 1600 pixels across, and it's like you could fall into the scene. Bravo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
After two visits to the post office they refunded FPI for the original package of flocking, so FPI quickly shipped out another package. The second shipment is currently in limbo in ohio despite it being two day shipping from early last week. Today the original package showed up in a severly dented box with ripped open tape and sharpie markings across it. Maybe I will receive the second package next month. Either way I can finally prevent glare in my Yashica TLR.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
developing this is going to suuuuuuck.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 04:40
|
|
|
OjaiYoda posted:developing this is going to suuuuuuck. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
OjaiYoda posted:developing this is going to suuuuuuck. Buy a minilab.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 06:32
|
|
|
OjaiYoda posted:developing this is going to suuuuuuck. If I were to take all that to my local lab for developing, it would cost ~$1.2k. Then it would take ~120 hours to scan. Rough estimates, of course.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Buy a minilab.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
OjaiYoda posted:developing this is going to suuuuuuck. what are your plans for it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 14:09
|
|