Re: [Leica] leica vs medium format

["Dan Post" <dwpost@email.msn.com>]

Charlie-
Hoping you weren't too near any tornadoes this week! It was nice to know
there was something happening west of the Washington Beltway, but one
Helluva miserable way to find out!

You are so right! I think the situation is that there are about 20 amateurs
for every pro on this list- the ratio may be even greater. From my
standpoint, and I was guilty of this, and maybe still am- I think we
amateurs think that if we have the latest and best whiz-bang gizmo, that we
can get 'professional' results. Your analogy of the auto mechanic is rright
on! I knew a guy, one of those mechanics who with a bare minimum of tools,
could listen to your engine, tell you which plug was fouled, pull it, tell
you why it fouled and fix it! No electronics, computer analyzers, or fancy
diagnostics. He simply knew what he was doing.
I am sure that we all love the 35mm format, we wouldn't be LUGgers if we
didn't, but you have to remember, or so I remember, Ernst Leitz liked to
hike and take pictures, and wanted something other than the bulky heavy
cameras available at that time ( maybe it's an apochryphal story, but it
plays well!). He still had, and probably used, a larger format when it
suited his purpose! Like your analogy, if I am in a place where a compressor
and air wrench is handy, it is a great way to get the lugnuts off the ole
Rover/Suburban/Lexus SUV- but if you were out on the road in the middle of
B.F.E. and had a flat, I give a lot to have a simple screw jack and a lug
wrench, if I hadn't had the foresight to bring them.
Harking back to the post to Tina, a pro knows what he/she wants to do, how
he/she wants to do it, and what to use to get the results!
All due respects to those who lust after the latest and best ( me too!), but
I would bet my best lens cleaning underwear that Jim, or Ted, Tina or
Harrison could take a 40 year old Leica, with 40 year old glass, and still
get results that would blow your socks off!
Dan


- ----- Original Message -----
From: <Summicron1@aol.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 11:28 AM
Subject: [Leica] leica vs medium format


> ted wrote:
> I believe we would have to concede the larger neg should yield the finer
> grained image in the general sense. However using extra fine grain film
for
> 35 to a medium emulsion Hassie film we might find the prints of equal
> credibility.
>
> But then any comparison in this kind of camera/film to camera/film only
> works under a controlled situation. Otherwise it's a lot of airtime for
> nothing.
>
> i couldn't agree more. I just got back from shooting the Grand Tetons and,
> yes, took my R3 and a variety of lenses for hiking purposes. Can't beat
the
> mobility.
>
> But for tripod-mounted shooting where mobility was not an issue I used my
> Graflex XL and 6X7 film backs and 100mm Zeiss Tessar lens. Bulky, slow,
> ponderous, but versitile in the extreme and the negatives (EK 100 and XP2)
> will be able to be enlarged into astonishing prints without having to do
the
> technical gymnastics that you need to come near to that same quality with
a
> 35 mm system.
>
> so, as the man says, it is apples and oranges. You must first decide what
> kind of shooting you want to do, then decide what tool you  need to do it,
> then get the best you can afford. Any auto mechanic knows this, why don't
> photographers?
>
> charlie trentelman
> ogden, Utah
>