Wheatfield penned ...
> I can work my tail off to get good results from 35mm, I can nail
> down my exposure and process the film just right to make sure
> the image is on the sweet part of the curve, and still not have
> an image as technically good as a hack medium format negative
> where I have barely paid attention to the meter, and sort of
> half assed slopped the film around in the chemistry for a while.
Yup! I just point my old 1950 Bessa II in the general
direction, set aperture & shutter by my feeling of the most
appropriate reading from a series of responses from one of
my centerweighted Pentax bodies & a tele lens and have
exquisite 6x9cm negs or transparancies result.
I can even print a portion of them in my Rinky-Dink(tm)
home darkroom, and just the part I can fit into the old
Durst M601 (6x6) enlarger blows away 35mm stuff.
Same holds for the old Yaschica A TLR
My next step equipment-wise will be the Pentax 67, though
I am also leaning towards a 4x5 rig if one falls in front
of me and is affordable. Digi-cams leave me cold - I have
no desire to move from chemicals to pixels. I have access
to a *real* pro lab in Miami that can work w/ up to 8x10
negs and put out chemical prints/duratrans up to 4x8ft at
expensive, but not exhorbitant, prices. I usually get, for
my own purposes, their machine 8x12's which blow every other
lab I have ever used product out of the water for $5.25ea
plus cheap USPS shipping. They have an associate b&w lab
which provides same sort of quality.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------
Bill D. Casselberry ; Photography on the Oregon Coast
http://www.orednet.org/~bcasselb
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
