Well, we touched on medium format the other day. However, I read
something interesting on the Photo.Net wedding photographer's list this
morning. Marc Williams, the same chap who posted nice comments about
the *istD on the Leica forum, posted some interesting observations
about MF vs. digital. Marc is a wedding photographer and a studio pro.
He's been shooting digital for quite some time, most recently with the
Canon 1DS. He was shooting all his weddings on digital but grew weary
of the digital darkroom processing. Most recently, he's gone back to
shooting weddings with a 'blad and three lenses. He says he just turns
his film into the lab and gets a set of proofs. He no longer has to
convert every image and print them. He scans and prints his finals, but
he claims it's far less work. He also feels the 6x6 results are
superior to the 1DS digital images. You can find the thread on the
Photo.Net wedding photographers forum if you're interested in reading
the entire debate. (It drew quite a few responses.)
I took out my 6x7 gear this morning and inspected it. I think I'm going
to shoot some MF BW next nice day. I have an urge to get back in the
darkroom with some nice, big negatives.
Paul
- RE: Speaking of Medium Format Paul Stenquist
- RE: Speaking of Medium Format Jens Bladt
- Re: Speaking of Medium Format William Robb
- Re: Speaking of Medium Format Paul Stenquist
- RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknonta I... J. C. O'Connell
- Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknon... Paul Stenquist
- RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super I... J. C. O'Connell
- Re: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Sup... Paul Stenquist
- RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super Iknon... Steve Pearson
- RE: Speaking of Medium Format - Zeiss Super I... J. C. O'Connell
- Re: Speaking of Medium Format brooksdj