sure you CAN do landscape on a P67, but WHY?
LF is cheaper and better and lighter. Using
an SLR for landscape when the camera is fixed
on a tripod doesn't make much sense to me.
Of course you would use manual focus regardless
of format. Autofocus is for grab shots when you
are in a hurry or cant focus fast enough to action.
That is exact opposite of landscape photography.
JCO

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 1:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?


Followup... actually I'd like to try 4 X 5.  I do think one can 'craft'
a 
shot regardless of format. That's why I think going to a 67 and all
manual 
focus will help in that regard.


Tom C.





>From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: Film vs Digita, was: lRe: Pentax is Dying?
>Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 11:39:46 -0600
>
>>From: "John C.  O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>4x5 is a far superior image quality SYSTEM, it is not because the 
>>lenses are better, actually some of them are worse than the P67 
>>lenses, it is just that the film size is so big you don't need as much

>>lens resolution to end up overall much sharper than P67. Add to that 
>>the fact that film grain is way less visible with the bigger negs and 
>>4x5 pretty much destroys p67 for landscape photography.
>>
>>I don't mean to sound harsh but your reply seems to be based on all 
>>the classic myths and sterotypes associated with LF by people who have

>>never done any LF photography.
>>
>>JCO
>
>You are correct... I have never done LF firsthand, or MF for that 
>matter.
>Here's the thing... let's say my personal "Keeper shots/Shots taken
Ratio" 
>is 1/36, or approximately one per roll (yeah, if I'm lucky).  If I go
out 
>and shoot 100 frames of 35mm, I might come back with 3 keepers.  If I
were 
>to only take 20 images on an outing I could come back with nothing
worth 
>keeping...  what % of your 4 x 5 shots are throwaway?
>
>Tom C.
>
>


Reply via email to