Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/11/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Jonathan Borden wrote: ><Snip> > Ok Mark, you are getting me started ... I've decided to start with a > Crown Graphic 4x5 (the darkroom I use is equiped for 4x5 enlargements)... I > expect to get into this for a few hundred bucks... > > I have printed some 4x5 negs and you are correct, there is a smoothness > of tonality. I wouldn't say that there is an absolute superiority to these > enlargements, 35mm have grain which gives a definite photographic effect to > the pictures. And at viewing distances 16x20 Cibachromes are still stunning > with 35mm negs. I think it is the picture that counts, and if you don't a) > have the camera with you b) have enough film c) have time to set up the > tripod etc. you are just going to miss the picture plain and simple. The > Leica tends to be there much more of the time. > But, you do have a point. Thanks but what lens? My 127 Ektar on my speed graphic is 5 leagues down from my 210 Fujinon on my Cambo. I've cleaned it up with all kinds of lighter fluid but it's as if I've put it back together wrong. Others have gotten better results from that classic than me I think maybe I got a dog. Made in Rochester. If I had a decent lens for that speed graphic I would take it out and shoot with it. It looks great on the shelf. A black leather box. Makes me feel like a real photographer when I look in my camera closet! Mark Rabiner Any of my smaller format cameras resolve better then the 127 Ektar on my speed graphic. But the 210 Fujinon for 4x5 is my high end but I almost never feel I need it. I shamefully use it once a year. I'm a sheetfilm dilettante.