Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/03/16

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] S2 vs. 645D sensor
From: robertmeier at usjet.net (Robert Meier)
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:18:27 -0500 (CDT)
References: <CB88B6A1.1BAB5%mark@rabinergroup.com>

Ilford has been making Delta 3200 film in 120 format for many years.   
Excellent stuff.


On Mar 16, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:

> I shot a lot of medium format film.
> I shot events with a Hasselblad for the most part.
> Not Nikon or Leica.
> I shot a lot of 220 Kodak tri x pro which was iso 320 and was tri x only in
> name. I specialized in black and white. People thought that was artsy.
> With the added size of medium format film and its need for more depth of
> field it was a clear candidate for using a higher iso film then you would
> when you shot 35mm. You'd not see the grain and you needed it
> But you couldn't do it.
> Because for the most part they didn't make it the stuff.
> Neopan 1600 or color neg pro 1600 films didn't come in 120 let alone 220.
> So it was a very frustrating thing.
> What make it possible to do what did grabbing people in action with my
> Hasselblad and sometimes even my Rolleiflex was my Norman 200C flash.
> I was an f11 guy at 8 feet and be there. This was a manual flash with a
> battery pack on your hip.
> 
> I wound have LOVED it if they made faster than 400 films in Brownie film 
> for
> my medium format cameras.
> It never happened.
> Shooting iso 320 or 400 films with those cameras was overkill to the max.
> As it was in the end shooting those films with 35mm format.  And shooting 
> at
> those ISO's now with digital full frame. Overkill. Unless I plan on 
> covering
> some of the larger walls at Grand Central Terminal which is not on my short
> list.
> I think of the 400 iso area now as "high rez".
> Much like I thought of Panatomic or Agfapan 25 in the 1980's.
> 
> -- 
> Mark R.
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/winterdays/
> 
> 
>> From: Lottermoser George <imagist3 at mac.com>
>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 17:33:59 -0500
>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] S2 vs. 645D sensor
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 15, 2012, at 4:52 PM, Richard Man wrote:
>> 
>>> Does anyone know if the S2 has microlens ala M9 or is that deemed not
>>> necessary?
>>> 
>>> Thread here:
>>> http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/35511-multi
>>> -part-leica-s2-review.html
>> 
>> Who cares?
>> They won't shoot ISO 132,000
>> ;~)
>> 
>> Regards,
>> George Lottermoser
>> george at imagist.com
>> http://www.imagist.com
>> http://www.imagist.com/blog
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D sensor)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D sensor)
In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D sensor)