gfen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm torn, I like everything about my 645 except teh fact that its "only" >645. >Will I really see an apprechiable difference in small prints (8x10, 5x7, >even 4x5 proof sizes) if I go from 645 to 67 No way. At those sized they'll be pretty much indistinguishable. >Pros: >645: Easier to carry, easier to handhold, tolerable flash sync. Plus: Bigger selection of lenses (you can use 645 lenses or, with an adapter, any lens made for the 67). Wider (rectilinear) wide angles available (the new 32-55 is beautiful). Smaller, lighter overall kit (With camera body, tripod and equivalent selection of lenses) More shots per roll of film. Faster film loading/unloading (especially if you get a spare insert). Film data imprinting (I *love* this feature on my MZ-S) Auto bracketing. Digital backs coming. >67: Bigger neg, its what I orginally wanted. Big neg easier to accomplish >than setup of a 4x5. Interchangable finders. (May not be an advantage for you, but then, at 8 x 10 print sizes, neither is the bigger negative...) >Cons: >645: Smaller neg, seems like a second choice. >67: Not as handholdable. Handhold flash w/o LS lens not gonna happen, >giant neg possible with a 4x5. >my biggest question, and what I need to know: Is there really a noticable >difference in the tonality of an 8x10 between 645 and 67. No. It really sounds as if you need the 645 and your ego is trying to get you to buy the 67. I faced the same dilemma as you and went with the 645 (original, manual focus version) because I take it hiking in some pretty rugged country sometimes; My decision was based on size/weight issues, but I've never regretted it from in image quality standpoint (or any other standpoint). -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
