[Leica] 35mm versus 120

[Paul Roark <proark@silcom.com>]

At 10:23 AM 3/18/2000 -0800, Erwin Puts wrote:
>
>Mike wrote in part
>"Assuming that "suitable material and technique" means a more-or-less
>100-speed film and a tripod, and presuming that one intends to end up
>with 16x20 enlargements (12X is 18 inches in the long dimension, or
>full-frame on 16x20 paper with a 1-inch border), my question would be:
>why not prefer a Hasselblad or a 4x5?"

Erwin responded in part:

>... And if I use my M6 with a 90mm APO at f/2 and 1/1000 of 
>a second handheld with 100 ISO, I will equal the image quality of a 
>Hasselblad with a 4/150. ...

The MTFs of the 90 at  f 2 are better than those of the 150 at f 4 (which
can be seen at the Photodo.com site).  However, because of the film size
differences the 150 will record more information and give a better image.

I test lenses also, and the image quality of the good medium format cameras
are still substantially better than those of the best 35s. 

35s are great for hand held shooting and where the image is not going to be
enlarged to much beyond 8 by 10.  However, that is not what the question
was.  It was aimed at 16 by 20s and shooting on a tripod.  For this 120
still has an advantage.  Unfortunately, the film is just not good enough
for the best 35 mm lenses to be fully exploited.

> Tests show that the emulsion/filmplane  in a Hasselblad 
>is far from flat...

Experienced medium format shooters learn how to keep the film flat.  35
film will also not lie flat where it has been pinched by the film can too long.

> The 2/90 
>apo gives me at 2 better image quality than the 4/150 at 4 and when 
>stopping down the apo to 4 it surpasses the Hasselbald 4/150.

Not true if you're talking about the image recorded on the film and using
the full film format.  Where the full negatives are enlarged to the same
size, the 150 wins the contest easily.

>So the question should not be: I a need a high quality 16x20 inch 
>print:  what format should I use?

But that is what was asked, and it's a very valid question.

>The question I asked myself is: I want to take pictures with the 
>Leica M6 because I like the photographic style that this camera 
>supports and I like to exploit the optical abilities of the Leica 
>lenses. Where are my limits? 

This is also a valid approach, but not the question that was posed.

The 90 f2 is a great lens [almost as sharp at f 2 as the Canon 200 f 1.8 at
1.8 :-) ], but the larger formats do still reign supreme when large prints
are the goal.  I've tried to move my landscape work to 35 several times,
always to return to medium format.

Paul Roark
http://www.silcom.com/~proark/photos.html