Cameron wrote:
> For someone wanting to upgrade from an autofocus SLR system into medium
> format, what is their best bet?
The 645NII
>I like the negative size of the 67, but
> manual everything and slow flash sync could be a problem for me.
Then the 645NII will fit the bill better.
>Is
It depends a lot on what you like to shoot. In my opinion the 645 is better
at weddings, functions, studio work, sports and action. For landscapes,
black and white, poster sized prints, and fine art I would lean towards the
67II where the bigger neg would ba an advantage. With the 67II I would wa
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of tom
> Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 3:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: 645n II vs 67II
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECT
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Cameron Hood
>
>
> For someone wanting to upgrade from an autofocus SLR system
> into medium
> format, what is their best bet? I like the negative size of
> the 67, but
> manual everything and slow flas
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bruce Dayton
>
>
>
> 645 format is closer to 35mm ratio and 67 is closer to 8X10. I have
> come to enjoy the less rectangular format and find that
> 35mm is a bit
> wide which is going to cause a signi
Cameron Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>For someone wanting to upgrade from an autofocus SLR system into medium
>format, what is their best bet? I like the negative size of the 67, but
>manual everything and slow flash sync could be a problem for me. Is there a
>huge difference in image quality
Cameron,
It is interesting to contemplate this question. The best way to
answer it is to determine how you intend to use the system. The 67II
is a bit slower to use and the flash synch is an issue for flash fill.
This can be overcome by using leaf shutter lenses. For normal flash
work, I have
7 matches
Mail list logo
