Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/02/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> They thought 120 film was a huge compromise the most popular > format was 5x7" when the Leica was invented or 7x5 as you Brits say. Probably plate or fractions of? > I think in ten years twenty years will kick ourselves when we look back at > 2013 in not having in the perspective in fully realizing just how early in > to the > digital age where're into right now. Its a big revolution and people are > just > figuring it out. And I think we're just past square one now. It is already beyond what most people need and way better than they have ever had before. > The full frame compacts are just coming out. The photo industry is real > excited about them but no one of course knows what the real effect will be. Um...who else is lining up? > I'm excited as hell about the new full frame Leica M and also the > Monochrom. Back when it came out you certainly weren't excited about the Monochrom.... > I'm used to the 35mm 24x36 format. My glass I've been using for decades is > sized for that. Though I also have Hasselblad glass for getting into medium > format digital as well. I think you may find your fabled glass is not up to a sensor of that size. > Most our output now is for web galleries and websites a few hundred pixies > across. And a 2x crop or less is fine for that perhaps. But there are > still those > who know that they will have to make blowups sometime to hang a show or > for a client. And for us to click a pic but have it be on a fingernail > sized format > is a very frustrating experience because we know we don't really have the > shot. Its just too small to make a full sized print from that. Unless you wanted grain I was never a fan of 35mm at 20/24 (I used medium format or sheet) but APS-C (and probably M4/3) can beat that. A cropped digital FF beats any 35mm film I have seen (bar Technical Pan and the like) at that size. john > > On 2/3/13 4:00 AM, "Frank Dernie" <Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com> wrote: > > > Yes Mark but you are -just- like Barnacks contemporary critics, never > > accepting that a smaller format could ever produce acceptable results. > > > > Well Leica proved them wrong, not as good as MF, 5x4 and 10x8 > > obviously, but entirely useable for reasonably sized prints and much > > more convenient for use hand held, traveling, climbing etc.. > > Today few people argue that MF digital sensors don't produce better > > results (at least in bright light), but superb and totally acceptable > > results in prints much bigger than Barnack would ever have believed > > possible are being made in their billions by people using the smaller > > sensors > nowadays. > > Just like 35mm film displaced 120. > > Get used to it, you are a dinosaur - just like all Barnack's critics > > back in the 1920s. > > FD > > > > On 3 Feb, 2013, at 08:05, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > > > >> Well Gary I think that there was a guy named Barnack who thought a > >> lot of work could be done with a quality compact camera with a 24x36mm > format. > >> After much thought he didn't go with 24x18 as a few others in the > >> time were going. Which was called "single frame" he went with "double > >> frame" taking up twice the film in length an at the time a bit of an > >> unusual > move. > >> His hunch was proved right. It turned out that most of what you'd > >> ever want to do could be done in that format for a hundred years later. > >> There's really nothing arbitrary about it and its not a minor subject. > >> As is its WAY more of an important issue that lenses. > >> If the thread bores you please continue playing with your cameras > >> which could come out of a box of crackerjacks and ignore the posts > >> about eagerly waited for larger format compacts. > >> Me I'll be not be totally happy until the first medium format compact > >> comes out. An in effect: digital Fuji folder > >> > >> > >> On 2/3/13 1:40 AM, "Gary Benson" <bensonga at gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> All these arguments over format size get very tiresome, very quickly. > >>> Some people will think if any subject is worth shooting at all, only > >>> 8x10 film will do. Others are quite happy to shoot with something > >>> else. > >>> > >>> I really thing good photos can be made with any camera.....they will > >>> just be "good" in different ways > >>> > >>> I say.....pick the camera or format that works best for you and your > >>> shooting requirements and leave the rest of us to do the same. > >>> > >>> Gary > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Leica Users Group. > >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Mark William Rabiner > >> Photography > >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > -- > Mark William Rabiner > Photography > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Mail was checked for spam by the Freeware Edition of CleanMail. > The Freeware Edition is free for personal and non-commercial use. > You can remove this notice by purchasing a full license!