Chamonix 45n-2
4x5 Tmax 100
Zeiss Tessar 180mm @f36
2 min exposure - metered at 60 seconds
Rodinal 1:100 stand
Finally a new photo for me! And first with the new Chamonix 45n-2 - an awesome camera. Also technically out of focus . A 180mm lens at 19 or so inches gives zero dof. I just decided to try and focus between the two flowers and stop the lens down all the way which on the Zeiss is a weird f36.
Fantastic work from everyone! I have been busy and not participating in this thread nearly as much as I would like to. Scanned the other roll from our trip to BBNP the other week. Here are a few from that roll. Canon ae-1, ektar 100 with 50/1.8 and 28/2.8
Chamonix 45n-2
4x5 Tmax 100
Zeiss Tessar 180mm @f36
2 min exposure - metered at 60 seconds
Rodinal 1:100 stand
Finally a new photo for me! And first with the new Chamonix 45n-2 - an awesome camera. Also technically out of focus . A 180mm lens at 19 or so inches gives zero dof. I just decided to try and focus between the two flowers and stop the lens down all the way which on the Zeiss is a weird f36.
What are the advantages of a medium format film camera vs a fullframe dslr when it comes to look? I assumed med format would have near zero grain unless needed? Do they offer visible dynamic differces? Assuming I shot the exposure properly of say mountain or flowers would the medium format be visually differt in hand? I assume also that I could print larger than most ff dslrs today so I guess that on top of money to do so would not be a problem. I only ask to mentally prepare myself to venture to med format analouge soon. Is anyone out there insane enough to use film to make money today, if I bet they wouldnt send their film to labs? What I what I guess is to see the film legend and parlay into what the people of yore produced. Im sure my Nikon. D700. can be highly capable even more than I however I still wonder wonder enough to sell my D700 get a super low priced canon 5D mki and a decent med format like the fuji. Then also I plan on buying high quality film that is capable to produce stunning images despite my lack of skills? I want film that is used for architecture and at the same time portraiture.
medium format tmax 100 is far beyond what any digital does for me. at this point you are already at huge print sizes so what good does a bit more resolution do you when you can get the smooth transitions and huge DR of film? especially since 6x7 and 6x9 are HUGE bits of real estate.
and this is gonna make a lot of people scoff but the better MF cameras Ive used (specifically the Mamiya 7) was nearly as sharp at 100% on Delta 100 as Ive ever seen anyone's 5D Mark II shots and this is just with an epson flatbed and no holder.
I approached digital thinking it was the solution to all my problems. I wanted to like it. there are still times when digital shots blow me away. but for me it was a solution to a problem I didnt have. just like autofocus and color filters.
they work for some people, but they never worked for me.
and while I struggle with medium format because of the cameras, the results ALWAYS worked for me. even when I had to part with cameras because their performance, it was because it was pricey for what I got, not because it wasn't great at reasonable output sizes.
rattymouse wrote:
Both great shots. I am wondering if I should pick up a 35mm camera. I only have shot 120 so far.
thanks!
it probably depends on how you feel about grain and enlargement capability. i like 35mm cause it's cheap, compact, i already have the lenses, and it's what i was always used to.
. A 180mm lens at 19 or so inches gives zero dof. I just decided to try and focus between the two flowers and stop the lens down all the way which on the Zeiss is a weird f36. 
