walter_batla

Another reason that MF lenses are more expensive, at least the Zeiss lenses for Hasselblad V series, is that each lens contains a shutter. Most, if not all, 35mm systems have a shutter in the camera body and do not require one in each lens.

Sounds like an awful lot of trouble to make something to do a job that can be done much better with existing 4x5 cameras. I can't imagine how you could effectively use lens board movements combined with hand held or rangefinder. If the idea is a quality image, get a 4x5 where needed, or a good MR where needed.

Jon:

 

Large format would work well for you. You will get the the best image quality for making large enlargements and large format gives you more flexibility for working with lighting conditions. I use 35mm, medium format and large format, both 4 x 5 and 8 x 10. When I am interested in the best possible image for enlargement, I alway use the large format.

 

If you really intend to take snap shots, that is a little difficult with a large format camera, but if you are planning to take posed shots and try to make them appear as snap shots, it will work well.

 

Enjoy your project.

That's the problem with digital printing with the equipment being used. You take a nice, sharp 4 x 5 and loose the detail. What a waste.

I use the Hasselblad quick coupling and several others. The Hasselblad is the best one that I have found.

My PME45 works quite well. I see no loss of brightness when using it. However, it is often desirable to use a hand held spot meter for correct exposure.

The answer depends on the purpose of the photograph. If one wishes to enlarge enough to view from a distance, a LF image makes 35mm or digital look like a toy. If one it photographing subjects that require movements of LF equipment, 35mm and digital simply cannot do the job unless one uses a digital back on a LF camera.

If one it taking shap shots to post on the internet or to keep in an album, 35mm is great and digital is ok if you get a decent, meaning non-ink jet-print. If you want to post in the internet and not print, digital is hard to beat. It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish. But if you want a very high quality image to enlarge, 35mm and digital just will not do the job as well as LF.

I found an old commercial 8 x 10contract printer on this site for about 200 bucks. It had about 12 bulbs that are 15w each. One can selectively turn each on or off to give different light intensity to different parts of the negative. Works great.

Steve:

 

I had not realized that someone caught me when that happened.

Rusla:

 

Very nice.

 

I think we have some hyper critical would be photo critics (a person who tends too readily to make captious, trivial or harsh judgments) commenting here.

What's the point of it? Why not just take a 4 x 5 and cut it up if you want little parts of it? It would be a lot easier than trying to use 35 mm film.

I think your film will work in a Graflex "23". I bought one of these recently on e-bay. Price was OK and camera appears to be in great shape.