Re[2]: Am I Really a Dinosaur?

[Bruce Dayton]

Shel,

You bring up a good point.  Each format has strengths and weaknesses.
You obviously have to balance them to be able to create the pictures
that you desire.  I am not abandoning 35mm, just trying to use it only
when MF's weaknesses outweigh it's strengths for a given situation.

Juan's posting made us see the weaknesses of 35mm without weighing
against it's strengths.  So I, and I'm sure others, used our own
experiences to fill in and felt that a larger format would answer his
issues.  I can now see that it would address his issues but perhaps
create even bigger problems than it solves.


Bruce Dayton



Thursday, February 14, 2002, 3:23:06 PM, you wrote:

SB> Sure, a bigger neg will yield higher quality, but at the cost of
SB> flexibility, portability, convenience, stealth, and so on.  Those of you
SB> who shoot pretty flowers and landscapes, and subjects that don't move,
SB> can easily use and benefit from a larger format.  However, for much of
SB> what Juan does, and what I do, the 35mm format is just about ideal. 
SB> There are few, if any, medium format cameras that will allow the kind of
SB> shooting I'm describing.

SB> Bruce Dayton wrote:
>> 
>> Boy, I gotta go with William on this.  For quite a while I had been
>> trying to procure and use the best optical quality lenses I could (for
>> Pentax) and use the finest grained films that I could to try and
>> improve the sharpness, clarity and tonal range of my pictures.  I
>> should have moved up to a larger format a few years ago.  I can say
>> that since I have finally taken the plunge, this is really fun! Almost
>> feels like the early days with my first MX.  And one look at the
>> negative/slide and wow! What a difference.
>> 
>> It is funny that as I look at the pictures stuck on the refrigerator
>> from friends and relatives, now I can even see the difference at 4X6
>> and smaller.  There is a bunch of stuff from P&S, 35mm and MF.  It
>> really shows.
-
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 .

Re[2]: Am I Really a Dinosaur?

[Bruce Dayton]

Boy, I gotta go with William on this.  For quite a while I had been
trying to procure and use the best optical quality lenses I could (for
Pentax) and use the finest grained films that I could to try and
improve the sharpness, clarity and tonal range of my pictures.  I
should have moved up to a larger format a few years ago.  I can say
that since I have finally taken the plunge, this is really fun! Almost
feels like the early days with my first MX.  And one look at the
negative/slide and wow! What a difference.

It is funny that as I look at the pictures stuck on the refrigerator
from friends and relatives, now I can even see the difference at 4X6
and smaller.  There is a bunch of stuff from P&S, 35mm and MF.  It
really shows.


Bruce Dayton



Thursday, February 14, 2002, 2:35:00 PM, you wrote:

WR> - Original Message -
WR> From: "Juan J. Buhler"
WR> Subject: Re: Am I Really a Dinosaur?



>> Shel, I think we are on the same side of this. All I'm saying
WR> is that
>> as long as digital is not better than film, I'll use film (and
WR> I'm
>> sure Tri-X will be available at least until then). Afterwards,
WR> my
>> pictures can only improve.

WR> Or, you could move upscale, and go to a larger negative.
WR> I really think the whole "I'll go digital when it is better than
WR> projecting through a postage stamp" concept is really silly,
WR> considering 35mm is such a underwhelming format.
WR> Its not like as if there is nothing better out there already, if
WR> you are waiting for digital to be better than what you are using
WR> now.

WR> William Robb
-
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 .