leonard_malkin

<p>To Stuart - it would be interesting to compare the 645 to a 5DII.<br>

My reason for interest in MF (and 4x5) stems from a cover of the NY Times magazine a few weeks back, showing a village in Yemen. As soon as I saw it, I said this must be a 4x5 and in fact it was (by Simon Norfolk). My point is that even with a relatively small enlargement, one can see the difference compared to a 35, a view supported by others at dpreview. Of course, maybe this was because of Simon, a pretty good photographer. His equipment, by the way, is not too expensive - Ebony SV454 with Schneider Apo Symmar 150 f5.6.</p>

<p>To Vick - you can get a roll film holder for 4x5?</p>

<p>I don't get it. A 4x5 will not be better than what I would get from a "small" camera? Do you mean this particular 4x5 or any 4x5?</p>

<p>Thinking about a 4x5 view camera but put off by the need for ground glass focusing with a hood and tripod. It would be nice to have a 4x5 rangefinder camera. The only one I can think of is the Speed Graphic. Is this a viable choice?</p>

<p>I'm thinking of moving to 120 film in the hope of getting better resolution than my Canon 40D or 7D. I looked at local scanning services and the best I could find was 3637x2433. My 7D has a resolution of ca. 5000x3500. Is it possible to get higher scanning resolution and if so, where and with what scanner?<br>

I see that North Coast Photo will scan 6x7 to 4815x5902. I'm wondering if one would see a large difference compared to the 7D.<br>

Also, scanning 6x4.5 gives only 4824x3533 or less than the 7D. I guess I don't understand how a relatively large film size would produce less resolution than a 7D whose sensor is less than "full" size.</p>

<p>Thanks to all for your responses.<br>

I plan first of all to get a 7D once I sell my 30D. I think then I'll rent a 5DII and do some comparison landscapes. It would be nice if I would be satisfied with the 7D - it'll save me about $2500.<br>

I still would like to try MF and I'm looking for someplace where I can rent. I plan to shoot some rolls and have a lab do the scanning and printing, just to see what's what.</p>

<p>To Eric. Your FF Nikon D700 has only 12 MP. With a Canon 5DII FF, you'd be working with 21 MP reducing the need to up-rez. Of course, there's also more noise to go along with the increased MP's.</p>

<p>To Daniel. Interesting, your use of the 7D for landscapes. I recently posted to dpreview and asked whether a 7D at ISO 100 and on a tripod would give landscape pics equivalent to a 5DII. As usual, I got answers all over the place. The conclusion was it could and couldn't and then the discussion drifted off to a discussion re DOF and other things. I guess I'll just try the 7D and see whether I like it. I might rent a 5DII to compare. I wonder if I could rent a MF somewhere?</p>

<p>I have no plan to shoot sports (or BIF) with a MF - for that I have a 40D, and soon a 7D. My interest in MF extends to landscapes.</p>

<p>How about this National Camera Exchange in MN? The used prices are really low. Any feedback on them?</p>

<p>I guess I should have been more specific - my question really was in regard to sharpness. To rephrase - will a MF camera give me a sharper photo than e.g. the Canon 5dII?</p>

<p>Many years ago, pre-digital, in the age of 35 mm film, I hungered for a medium format camera but such was financially out of my league. Today, especially with the used market (are prices from a place called National Camera Exchange for real and are they trustworthy?), a Pentax, Mamiya and even a Hasselblad are within my reach. Even new ones from B&H are not that expensive. I've read in this forum that even the best MF struggle to meet the quality of e.g. a Canon 5DII. However, when I look a t a MF photo I'm still impressed with it's incredible sharpness even compared to a 5D. Popular Photography recently had a landscape spread with a 5DII and Pentax 645 and I swear the MF is noticeably sharper. Am I being carried away by emotion or is it worth the extra work to go to MF? I already have Canon stuff so going to a 5D would not be a big step.<br>

I guess the question is, is it sort of firmly established that the 5D and similar really outperform a MF with regard to acuity?</p>