bill_dewberry
-
Posts
673 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by bill_dewberry
-
-
Well, all i know is what is. I have been to three calumet stores in the last week, and it looked like a scene from an old movie. Very, very long lines to stock up on Polaroid film, everyone is buying out the stock, especially type 55, the word is that that will be the first to disapear. I bought all the type 664, 669, and type 55 that I could afford, Calumet says they anticipate no restocking at all once the inventory is sold out, that that will be the end of any pola film to come.
-
Well, all i know is what is. I have been to three calumet stores in the last week, and it looked like a scene from an old movie. Very, very long lines to stock up on Polaroid film, everyone is buying out the stock, especially type 55, the word is that that will be the first to disapear. I bought all the type 664, 669, and type 55 that I could afford, Calumet says they anticipate no restocking at all once the inventory is sold out, that that will be the end of any pola film to come.
-
I'll take that bet.
-
The difference is one of compression of facial features, such as nose & ears. The 180 is the traditional portrait lens, softer, with more compression of the face. The 140 is sharper, for better or worse, with less compression. If you go to mamiya web page, look at master showcase, Mark Selliger, you'll see portraits with the 140. I ended up getting the 140, skipping the 180, and getting the 210.
-
Print File neg preservers 120-4ub, holds 12 6x7 120 negs, 4 strips of 3. Don't think you can buy a hassy system for 2,000, so that leaves bronica & Rb. I have both a hasselblad & RZ, the hasselblad is smaller, but you get used to what you have. The RZ with the bellows focusing and rotating back is certainly more flexible to use. I also like the longer shutter speeds, up to 8 seconds, on the RZ. Useful when doing macro work like flowers.
-
No, my Xenar says feet on the focusing knob.
-
Dollors permitting, the best bet is a Hasselblad Pola 100, which might run you $ 200 US. This will take an assortment of polaroid film, both B & W and color, 664 being the most common B & W film, and 679 a posiible color film.
-
I boght one for my ELX, tried it out but did not use it, it worked but made the winder sound like a sewing machine, I went back to the varta.
-
My nephew recently drove my brothers car into the curb, the nephew being a young new driver. I carefully explained to him that it was not his lack of ability that caused the crash, but rather it was the fault of the car designer, and that my brother should sell that car and get one that performs correctly.
-
I like Gil Ghitelman for repairs, you can talk to him.
-
Hasselblad USA is american.
-
I know a fine art photographer who has made some amazing images with his 127, it is a very good lens, not overly sharp, but a terrific portrait lens. He also shoots flowers with it, stopped way down. All in all, an excellent lens. The KL lenses by definition have better quality control, and the benefit of more modern optic technology.
-
Practice, practice a lot. I use the non split image focusing screen, that works for me; lots of people use the split image screen, Mamiya makes 2 different ones, vertical & horizontal. The best for portraits would be the vertical, focusing on the eyes. Really, once you settle on a screen, pratice each day, even shooting chromes to check the results.
-
Gee, .. I wonder what lens Mike Dixon used, that nose reminds me of
Walter C. Beery.
-
Yeah, but how about that film flatness problem ?
-
Well, the good news is Roger Michel contained his response to less
than 10,000 words, a photo.net first ever.
-
For an excellent photograph, every camera is a tripod camera, whether its my 35mm leica or my TLR. I cannot handhold as well as a tripod can. Also, one may percive a comment as either a critique, or in other cases a rambling rant.
-
Roger Michel = blah, blah, blah, ; oh make that blad, blad, blad.
-
Amen to Robins' answer. Some people love to obsess over these issues.
-
No strangeness at all, optically the 65 is much sharper corner to corner.
-
The 65 is the better lens, by far.
-
I'd say $ 1300.
-
The standard answer seems to be the 90 2.8, which I now own. I once
owned the 90 2.0, and prefer those images to the 2.8. Yes, the 2.8 is
sharper, but I feel portraits with the summicron "feel" better,
sharpness is not the end all in portrait photography.
-
I shot some last week, using a hassy 150 with 16 extension tube, worked great. 1/2 stop exposure compensation.
Medium format for the long haul
in Medium Format
Posted