Re: 35mm vs 2 1/4, my real world experience

[ABreull@aol.com]

In einer eMail vom 08.08.1997  16:39:57, schreiben Sie:

>I sold my Hasselblad stuff because in my real-life location situations 
>the results from it were often not as sharp as what I get from 35mm.   
>Sure there is less grain but it is also often less sharp.  Some will 
>swear other-wise and I agree with the theory and I have some great 2 
>1/4 negs but I have much  more that  I'll never use too!   35mm gives 
>me better results! (note: 10" x 14" is my standard print size)
>
>I think it's due to three reasons:  Less depth of field for medium 
>format lenses,  less actual resolution (lpm) of medium format lenses 
>and subject and camera movement due to having to stop down further to 
>achieve more depth of field.  There is always some wind in Ecuador no 
>matter where you go and you can forget about hand holding a Hasselblad 
>anywhere in my opinion.
>
>I found my studio stuff from it was incredibly sharp, but those 
>situations eliminated all three of the above factors.  


I have absolutely the same experiences. And when you've carried that wood
tripod and the additional this and that for several miles, and finally found
something worth the whole lot of MF labor, then something else is going
wrong: 
At my last Hassy-on-tripod-adventure, when each and everything stood still,
the earth and comet Hale-Bob had moved !

- -Alf