Jump to content

werner boeckelen

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    71

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by werner boeckelen

    Dynamic Range, APS-C (Digital) vs 6x7, 6x4.5 (Film)

    in Medium Format

    Posted

    <p>I was using MF with 6x6 and 6x7 for many many years. When switching over to digital I started with a Fuji S3 and I can guarantee you, that esp. this Fuji APC Sensor was/is in terms of DR at least one stop over any existing Color Slide or Color Negative film on the market. No way any colorfilm can compete with a Fuji S3/S5 in terms of DR (it is still much better in terms of DR in comparison to Canon 5DII). The only area film is ahead is b&w 100 ASA and below.</p>

    <p>Of course there is the issue with resolution, which is way better with a Film MF in comparison to a DSLR APC like Fuji S3.</p>

    <p>The game changed with the upcoming Canon 5DII. Klaus Puska did a phantastic Job in publishing his results between a Mamiya 7 with Fuji Velvia 100 in comparison with 5DII. Judge yourself <a href="http://naturewindows.com/articles/article090116.html">here</a><br>

    There is no doubt, that using a MF has plenty of advantages in comparison to a DSLR - for me the advantage is not a technical any more, it's more kind of the spirit of using film and concentrating during taking pictures.</p>

    <p> </p>

    mediunm format or 35mm best suited for weddings?

    in Medium Format

    Posted

    About a year ago, I completely changed to digital and never regretted it (Fuji S2pro). Yes it is an investment, but think about film price for let's say 50 rolls + developement. You gain so much more flexibity and the fear of the famous "eyes closed" in the decisive moment is not a problem any more. With digital you can have 1000 shoots with one CF-Card (Microdrive) in a row - no hazzle with changing film. In a quick moment you can change 100ASA to 800 ASA if necessary - you quickly notice the very big advantage over film. So my advice: Forget about 35mm, take a MF with you for the special ones and for the rest take a Digi!

    Werner

    Rollei P66 vs. Hasselblad Projectors ,Honest comments

    in Medium Format

    Posted

    Edward,

     

    I do have P66S and also started with the 150/3.5 lens. I changed to the 120/2.8 and I also use a Schneider 150/2.8, but never tried the 90mm. I did some comparisons with the Rolleivision 66 DUAL P and the Hasselblad. Yes they are brighter, visible, but not a different liga. What I say, in direct comparison the 150/3.5 is to my opinion a real dog, so change of lens is definetly the way to go.

    Is medium format 'worth it' if you don't have a darkroom for an amateur?

    in Medium Format

    Posted

    >>> With digital, it's all locked up on the media and there's no guarantee the technology will be around in ten years to read it.

     

    Harvey, I agree with you, that there are constraints with digital. I hope you are aware of the big nuisance of film as well. Think about:

     

    + Fire, flood, theft (esp. in these days!) - as I can now easily copy my whole picture-library on some DVD's and bring those copies outside of my house, I can lean back and feel save.

     

    + organization - I always felt bored to write down time and date, exposure information, locations and then to keep up with your picture organization, or even worse to send s.b. a copy - it's an awful job, this alone is worth to leave film only for time to time use. Now it's an easy job, really to quickly find or copy s.th.- I agree that this is my fault, but my skills are more of a photographer than a inventory organizer.

     

    + Scratches, dust, color-fading, closed eyes in the decisive moment, lost or/and ruined films, time you spend to get things developed.

     

    I still love MF, no doubt, on the other hand I am really happy with the faciltation, digital brought to my work of pictures. If you don't trust Digital, why not simply get the most important pictures back on film!

    Which objectiv: 4/50PQ 2,8/50 PQS or 4,6 60-140AF

    in Medium Format

    Posted

    Alfred,

     

    The direct answer is, no I don't think it is much better. Though I think you are comparing apple and oranges. I think all three lenses are excellent and in time of Imageprocessing thru Photoshop & Co lens quality is still important, but a top-level difference can easily be manipulated. For the 2.8/50 and the 4.0/50 you can compare yourself the MTF's on http://www.sl66.com/slx/MTF.htm . To my opinion the Zoom makes the camera really hard to handheld, the 4.0/50 is OK and the 2.8/50 is a juwel in low-light. At the end the use of a tripod will impact the results more, as the differences in lens-quality.

     

    Werner

    Rollei SL66 tele lens choice

    in Medium Format

    Posted

    The 150 is a great lens, tag sharp esp. in combo with the SL66. It's even better in handling as with the hasselblad - reason: you don't need any extention tube. My experience is, that for a head only portrait the lens is ideal, as you are in an acceptable distance (better than the 120) from your model, and you still have enough DOF for getting both eyes sharp. The leaf-shutter 150 lens lags the HFT Coating, but if you are always using a shade it should not be much of an issue. I also own the 5,6/250 and I made the same experience as Zibadun - too long, too dark for focusing, not handy, not as sharp as the 150 (still OK though)

    Nikon Medium Format Film Scanner

    in Medium Format

    Posted

    According to the sales & presales people at the Hannover CeBIT (largest computer-Fair worldwide) they are currently struggling with the driver software. They had two preproduction 8000 machines at the booth, which did already a quite smooth job. The demoed it with Velvia Slides.

    They want to deliver begin of june here in Germany.

     

    Just a couple of meters away from NIKON I had also the opportunity to have a first look at the Polaroid 120 Scanner. I couldn't have a demo (silverfast has just delivered the drivers), but interesting enough was the big difference of the film-holder technology - to my oppinion one of the major important sucess factors - if you want to have the 4000 dpi quality also within the scan - you definitely must have a flat source material.

    The Nikon-part appeared to me much better engineered and also much more stable. Just a personal observation.

×
×
  • Create New...