|
The 65mm lens with the floating element will only fire in mechanical mode (locked 1/400 shutter) on my RZ67 when I have the left-hand grip shutter release plugged into the body. Does this make any sense or is it just weird cameras being weird?
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
I love my Mamiya C330 but I'm starting to feel restricted by the square format. What's the best option at 6x7? The Pentax looks pretty hot but is there anything I should know about before dropping cash on a new camera?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
Are interchangeable lenses a necessity? If not, the Fuji GF670 is beautiful; compact; and in my own experience, very reliable. The viewfinder is accurate, though sometimes I wish it had a longer rangefinder base length. If you must have interchangeable lenses, perhaps a Mamiya 7?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2015 23:39
|
|
|
JSW2 posted:Are interchangeable lenses a necessity? If not, the Fuji GF670 is beautiful; compact; and in my own experience, very reliable. The viewfinder is accurate, though sometimes I wish it had a longer rangefinder base length. If you must have interchangeable lenses, perhaps a Mamiya 7? I guess I should have added... Price is a consideration. I'd love a Mamiya 7 but it's not going to happen anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:I love my Mamiya C330 but I'm starting to feel restricted by the square format. What's the best option at 6x7? The Pentax looks pretty hot but is there anything I should know about before dropping cash on a new camera? The Pentax 67 is basically the best option if you're on any kind of a budget. The Mamiya 7 is the King Of Medium Format but it's certainly not cheap. The Mamiya RB/RZ 67 are both nice cameras but a definite handful if you shoot a lot of handheld. That's the other affordable system besides the 67. The GF670 is nice too but very expensive. There's also the earlier GW/GSW series of rangefinders, but you're better off getting them in 6x9. The lenses are the same, and the focal lengths are better on 6x9 (24mm and 35mm) than on 6x7 (33mm and 45mm). It's just a different frame mask and winding mechanism, so you can always crop down the 6x9 shots after the fact, but you can never go the other way. Oddball options: If you want interchangeable lenses, Fuji made the earlier G690 series. They're cool and have the same fantastic lenses as the GW/GSW models, but they're not too common in the US so you may be harder up for lens selection, service, etc. The Koni Omega rangefinders are nice but the lens selection isn't very large. The 58/60mm lens is great, the 90mm is a standard Tessar, and the long lenses are kinda uncommon (long lenses suck on rangefinders anyway). There's also the Bronica GS-1, basically a big Hasselblad but again, limited selection of lenses and less common. There's the Mamiya Press / Polaroid 900SE which probably has backs that fit 6x7. And finally the Graflex XL series, which are modular out the rear end but very uncommon. You could also make your own - a 2x3 press camera could have a 6x9 or 6x7 rollfilm back on it. You could have movements and stuff when you needed them, too. And one more - the Fuji GX680 basically crams all the technical capabilities of a field camera into a SLR. It makes a RZ67 look tiny, it's not gonna be great for fast shooting, it's all electronic, and it's really not that common in the US. But it's a pretty cool camera too.  And here's the RZ67 versus a 35mm SLR: 
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Nov 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Awesome text Thanks bro, that pretty much covers everything! That GX680 looks rad - the idea of carrying around such a monster sounds very rad (in theory.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
So actually I just took a look and KEH has a 180mm T/S for the G690. How in the gently caress do you even use a T/S on a rangefinder? Does the finder have equivalent movements or what 
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
fwiw I handhold my RZ67 all the time and I'm a frail nerd. It also looks pretty cool:
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Thanks for the kind words guys.MrBlandAverage posted:My thoughts exactly. Good stuff. My photography knowledge is still quite shallow, thanks for posting this, I'll have to get a copy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
 Hotel Globus, Firenze by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 03:08
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:I love my Mamiya C330 but I'm starting to feel restricted by the square format. What's the best option at 6x7? The Pentax looks pretty hot but is there anything I should know about before dropping cash on a new camera? The pentax is pretty nice, the 1/1000 shutter is great. However it is enormous and heavy. It's not too expensive, and the image quality is nice. There are also lots of lenses available. Should be able to get a body, prism, and 50mm equivalent lens for under $500. Plus, you can get the handle for it. I like the fuji gw670, since I also just bought one. It handles nicely, has it's own quirks, but it's a very simple purely mechanical camera. It's big, but it's also rather light. People talk about how it doesn't feel durable because it's plastic, and while that is true, it also makes it light and nice to handle without gloves in the winter. The only things I don't like about it are that the controls are exactly backwards from my Nikon, and that it only goes up to 1/500 shutter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
From a technical perspective, why is Portra so rad at doing neon glow? Also, didn't some goon (MrBlandAverage?) have a handy reciprocity guide for Portra 400?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
 Psychic Reader Tarot Cards by Isaac Sachs, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
Helicity posted:From a technical perspective, why is Portra so rad at doing neon glow? Portra has a really long "shoulder" before it blocks up and clips. If you look at this generalized diagram, you can see how the slope for "overexposure" (the shoulder) is much lower than the slope for normal exposure - this means that the contrast for overexposed parts of the image is much lower.  Applied to neon, this means the captured brightness of the neon will be much less more bright than the rest of the scene than if the curve were linear. Practically this means you should expose for the rest of the scene and the neon will just be however it is. Here's the reciprocity curve I calculated:  Adjustment should be to time, not aperture. edit: here's an easier to remember set of values you can interpolate between in your head in the field - 4s +1/3 10s +1 30s +1 1/2 60s +2 180s +2.5 MrBlandAverage fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Nov 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
Awesome info - thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
elgarbo posted:I guess I should have added... Price is a consideration. I'd love a Mamiya 7 but it's not going to happen anytime soon. If price is a concern look around for a Koni Omega range finder. I paid next to nothing for mine and it's a tank. Lens selection kinda sucks though, I just have the 90mm and 58mm, the wideangle was not cheap. 8th-snype fucked around with this message at 06:49 on Dec 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
 hatchery by Max Piepenbrink, on Flickrchamonix 45f1 with nikkor sw 90mm @ 1 minute 30s @ f/22 or 32 on portra 400
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
 Tanglin Halt by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
 Calypso 8x10 BGA, 14" Darlot Petzval Sludge Tank fucked around with this message at 10:15 on Dec 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 09:23
|
|
|
Nice
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
 Here's the out-take.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Tried a portrait on my Chamonix too. Ox by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
what the gently caress posted:
I actually prefer this one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
Spedman posted:I actually prefer this one. Yep, same here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
outtake is dope as heck dude
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
 _DSC2315 by Maciej, on Flickr _DSC2227 by Maciej, on FlickrMore niceland.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
 loading by Max Piepenbrink, on Flickrmore night shooting, chamonix 4x5, portra 400, etc. a cyberpunk goose fucked around with this message at 04:29 on Dec 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
Putrid Grin posted:
Looks like you took that a bit too far
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
 Cameo Loans by Isaac Sachs, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
 gym by Max Piepenbrink, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
 Bukit Batok by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
How do you guys store your 6x7 negatives? Strips of 3 fit a lot of archive sheets, but then I have the odd 1/10 exposures that needs to be cut. As few cuts as possible would be nice for keeping things from curling I guess. edit: it's an Epson 4990 and can only realistically fit 1 at a time, but they don't sit in the holder well unless there are at least 2. luchadornado fucked around with this message at 01:45 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
Depends on your holder.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Helicity posted:How do you guys store your 6x7 negatives? Strips of 3 fit a lot of archive sheets, but then I have the odd 1/10 exposures that needs to be cut. As few cuts as possible would be nice for keeping things from curling I guess. Strips of 3 so you can fit a whole roll of 120 in these: http://www.printfile.com/120-4ub_100.aspx
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
 Porta4169 by Brett Schlough, on FlickrPortra good, dust bad
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
Helicity posted:How do you guys store your 6x7 negatives? Strips of 3 fit a lot of archive sheets, but then I have the odd 1/10 exposures that needs to be cut. As few cuts as possible would be nice for keeping things from curling I guess. You want a minimum strip of 2 negatives for handling purposes. I still aim for the ability to contact-print on 8x10 paper, so that 4x3 strip holder is too big. 3x3 + 1x1 is dumb: you can either do it 5x2 or 3x3 +1x2. I prefer the latter since it's fewer strips. Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 08:15 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 08:11
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:3x3 + 1x1 is dumb: you can either do it 5x2 or 3x3 +1x2. I prefer the latter since it's fewer strips. You mean 3x2 and 2x2, right?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
 Delicious Baby Back Ribs by Isaac Sachs, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 17:31
|
|