alex_szeto

I am thinking of a medium format camera with view camera capability.

<p>

Hasselblad's arcbody seems to be the one among the very limited choices.

<p>

Anybody can suggest some reviews available on the net or anybody can share your first hand experience with this unusual camera?

http://www.zoerk.com

<p>

They claim that their gadgets can add tilt and shift capabilities to 35mm cameras. Sound sweet but rarely heard about this brand. Does anybody have any experience about these weird accessories?

Thank you for all your inputs.

<p>

Pete, I agree with you that sample variation may be the main cause.

<p>

The focal plane curvature in 35/1.4 really makes me think twice

before I move. Al Smith, thanks for the piece of useful extra

information.

<p>

Regards.

Worthwhile to upgrade from Nikkor 35mmF2 AIS to 35mmF1.4 AIS (both

manual)?

<p>

BODY: I have been using the Nikkor 35mmF2 AIS manual (on FM2n) for several

years and I was dissatisfied with its resolution since the first roll

of film it gave me---I felt that many point-and-shoots, especially

the Pentax ones, superceeds this "reputational" lens in terms of

sharpness. However, I have to use it because I have no bucks left

and 35mm has the most commonly-used picture angle.

<p>

Today I can spare enough to think of upgrading my 35mm workhorse, now

the question is: Is the difference between the sharpnesses of

35mmF1.4 (regarded as a Nikon classic) (grade 3.9 by photodo) and the

35mmF2 (grade 3.3 by photpdo) significant enough to justify a switch

over?

<p>

Also thinking of 28mmF3.5PC or 35mmF2.8PC (David Ruether said the

latter is the best performer among the 35mm's) instead of a 35mmF1.4

(all manuals).

<p>

What are your comments? Thanks in advance.