kc4fox

That's the first I've ever heard the older f/8 version of the lens referred to in any way

as better than the f/5- interesting. I've only heard those with both as saying that the

f/8 is "not as good," that it "doesn't look as nice," and is harder to use (that I believe,

if only for lack of rangefinder coupling).

Interesting.

If you like the look that film is giving you, if it contributes to your work, your art, your

play, then... What's the question? Come on- you already know the answer! It sounds

like you are doing the right thing for yourself.

There are advantages for both media. Neither cross very well into the other in many

areas.

Personally, I like the depth of field effects my portraits on film have. I don't have to

pay multi-kilo-dollars to get those effects, too, and I do it with fairly long lenses, like

150mm (645, 6x7, 6x9, or even 4x5!). I like the evenness of highlights film offers. I

like the amazing amount of detail available to me with film, that digital, though

possible to imitate and capture, would be extremely expensive and time consuming.

I like developing my own black and white.

I also like digital.

I like the speed I can shoot and shoot and shoot and not worry about having to spend

more $. I like the instant feedback (though it's usually worthless for critical

judgement). I like scanning my negatives with my Epson scanner, printing them on my

2200 photo printer, and giving them to a friend sitting right there along side me (I

usually prefer Polaroids, but 8x10 is a very expensive Polaroid media indeed!) or

selling them.

I like the combination of the two formats- how about printing digital negatives for

printing out paper? Print that negative, put it on some amazing paper, set it in the sun

and in 30 minutes I have an image that requires some chemical processing, but looks

very unlike anything I could come up with digitally...

Don't limit yourself to either/or type statements. You are doing good by

experimenting. What you like will never go out of style- it'll just get harder to use.

Just like anything in life.

I traded in my Mamiya 7 for the 645AF kit from MPEX. I've already got Medium Format

rangefinders, so the 7 was superflous. I'm not sad that I did.

First, the 80 is a stop faster.

Second is that I can read the viewfinder information (takes an irritating second or two

on the M-7 to find it in the finder- and this is after 40 rolls of film)

Third is that I can take full face portraits without bothering to crop (lenses focus

closely enough).

&c.

The best bit is that I bought it for the Autofocus, and that part works. I can't reliably

focus an SLR (quite unlike a rangefinder!) so this was quite a boon to me.

The 7's lenses are awesome. I just prefer other limitations on my systems.

I'm looking for a 250 F-5, the longest I've used for the Universal is the 150, and that

is only a "fair" lens in my book (don't overmuch like Tessars or tessar-like designs).

How much of a head-and shoulders can you get with the 250mm?

Cast Iron isn't that strong against shocks- ask the many tubs my family and I have

removed, with sledgehammers. A good pop, and it is apart...

I was the photographer for a best friends wedding- and she wanted pictures of her

and her hubby-to-be saying their vows, and standing at the altar. The only way, since

flash wasn't allowed, was to use Illford 3200 and push to 12,800.

I used a Mamiya Universal with a 150mm lens, 6x9 back, and ran it wide open.

Developed it myself the following day.

The result?

I got nice pictures, with good tonality at the 8x10 blow-up. I did use a tripod, but I've

never forgotten how happy I was when I pulled the film out of the rinse and hung it

up- the huge negatives were simply luminous in their own way, and my friend was

very happy.

The pictures *did* have more contrast than I'd have otherwise liked, but printed on

soft paper they worked well enough.

I'd just like to hear about lens tests on the new S3- I'd love to know how that new

50mm performs!

I've a Universal with a 50mm, 65mm, 75mm (needs to go to a shop- the shutter just spit a leaf), 100 f-2.8, 127mm, and 150mm lenses.

I did have a 100mm 3.5 lens that needed to go to the shop.

The 65mm lens is an interesting beast, to say the least. It is of a simple formula but since it is of so few elements has an advantage that my lab boys put best when they asked which lens I had used to photograph the "Tall Ships" as they came into Cleveland, as the negatives were some of the "punchiest" they had seen. The simple formula is very effective, and simply so. Bokeh is non distracting.

I can't say the same about my Tessars (the 127mm and the 150mm), as they have the typical "target" look to them shot wide open (as is typical of the lens design). I only have two, though, and I shoot them stopped down a bit, or in situations where the out-of-focus highlighs aren't going to be distracting.

The 50mm lens is stellar.

I actually LIKE the 65mm finder, I don't wear glasses. It is also pretty good if you are too cheap to buy the Polaroid multi-finder and want to see what the 75mm is going to show on Polaroid. My 50mm finder fell apart when I bought it. Though big, it's not the best made piece of gear I own.

I'm just sad that my favorite lens, the 75mm, has to go to the shop for a shutter repair. I won't be able to use it for a while...

Buyer beware.

I purchased an little folder for $300 from someone who is known to work on them, restore them and CLA them.

I asked for a $300 working camera and I've had to send it back a number of times. When I got it, focus was off and there were light leaks. I sent it back, it came back FARTHER out of focus, and a light leak. I paid to have the focus adjusted correctly and the little camera started taking very nice pictures, but I had to send it back for the light leak.

A $300 camera has cost me $36 in shipping, $60 for a columnation, 8 test rolls of film, including developement, or nearly $500.

Get an agreement between you and the seller that you aren't going to pay shipping for returns and that the little thing is guanteed to work or else they'll cover your test films, if at all possible.

Good luck! The pictures that I've taken that weren't terribly light stained or out of focus are very nice.

Just so that you know- the later versions of the 100 f-3.5 DIDN'T offer the retraction feature. I know because I bought one in Columbus (Midwest), and no amount of turning would convince it to retract. It was an 'E' model.

The retracting model is easy to twist and push into it's mount, it's obvious. There is also an orange graphic on some demonstrating a sideways 'U' with little arrows, if I remember right.

Don't worry about it if you aren't using the swing back and focusing glass.

cox.net. I meant, cox.net

JD

Tony is doing fine, I just spoke with him last week, though he is busy, I'm still waiting for my 50mm (months). I had called to ask about a 75mm lens on e-Bay, deciding instead to get a Sansone-Mamiya 600se with a 75 instead.

His domain has changed to 'cox.com' so change any references to him that you might have.