Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/12

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Another Leica vs medium format debate
From: Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:13:00 -0700

Henry Ambrose wrote:
> 
> >
> >Check out the newest PHOTO Techniques.  There is an article titled "Truth
> >and Beauty: The Gestalt of Small vs. Large Format"  by Mike Johnston. ><snip>
> Where does "large format" begin? Anything bigger than 35?
> 
> I just don't think any of this really matters. Please yourself! Use
> whatever gear you want.
> >
> >Leically,
> >
> >Tina
> 
> Training to be an old grump,
> 
> Henry Ambrose
> 
> Having said this I may read the article. :)

I agree this small vs. Large is off puttingly non based in our real world. We
have three main divisions usually. Small, Medium, and large. Small is 35, medium
is 120/220/70mm and large is 4X5 and bigger. To all of a sudden blur the
difference between medium and large has not positive value from where I sit..
But I will indubitably be checking out the article as I always read that rag.
Mark Rabiner