Hi, I went to a talk and slide show yesterday given by the UK photojournalist Tom Stoddart. I was surprised to learn that he uses 2 Leica M6s and an old Rolleiflex 6x6. As far as I could gather he carries them all at the same time. Some of his most famous photos were shot with the Rolleiflex. There seem to be 2 factors which decide which he uses: which format bests suits the scene, and how important the quality issue is.
This doesn't really answer your question, but it strikes me as interesting in itself, and also is a useful counter to the often-repeated claim that photojournalists have 'all gone digital'. I've noticed recently, and heard from some photojournalists themselves, that a lot of them are now shooting on larger formats just so that their work stands out from the digital stuff. Tom Stoddart reckoned that there is a distinct advantage in giving editors a well-made large print to hold rather than submitting work on a screen. Of course, this is for situations where speed of delivery is not a factor. Here are some thumbnails of his best known work. http://www.tomstoddart.com/portfolio/lightbox.html This one is particularly well known: http://www.tomstoddart.com/portfolio/pages_big/portfolio_18.html --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wednesday, March 27, 2002, 2:37:50 PM, you wrote: > More and more of us are using medium format along with our 35mm K-mount systems. How >do you cope with this? Are you shooting MF under certain circumstances and 35mm at >other? Personally, I've used > both systems side by side and consequently are constantly agonizing about what to >use when and how balance lens selection between the two formats. I'm torned between >the wish of extra quality of MF > and therefore using MF as much as possible (and investing in more, longer telephoto >645 lenses), and the wish of saving as much weight as possible. I have now finally >decided on the following > general nature/landscape outfit: 645N body, FA645 33-55/4.5, FA645 55-110/5.6; MZ-S >body, FA* 200/4 ED Macro, FA* 400/5.6. Now this outfit will cover focal lenght from >20mm to 400mm (in 35mm system > terms) and is very versatile. Common sense(?) have told me since I already own the >wonderful, albeit heavy, FA* 200/4 Macro I'll better take advantage of it and put it >into regular use. Using this > lens with! > a heavyer MF outfit is out of the question due to weight issues. Nedless to say, I >don't yet own the 645 lenses above but their low weight is pretty amazing and allow >me carrying a complete system > withou excessive weight. I would, however, have prefered something like a 75-150/5.6 >instead of the 55-110/5.6. > Pål > - > 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 . - 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 .
