Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/01/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]There is no question here. It is oxymoronic to compare 35mm Leica and LF and expect to se "no" difference. Place a 35mm camera with an APO/ASPH lens next to a 4x5 camera with an APO/ASPH lens and take the same scene. Use Tech Pan in the 35 and anything from Tri-X on down to Tech Pan in the 4x5. Make a 16x20 from the 35mm neg and a 16x20 from the 4x5 neg. Even a moron could easily tell the difference. I've been using 35/6x6/4x5 for 50 years. Same film, same developer, everything from Hi Contrast Copy in H&W Control, Technidol, Adox KB14, Pan-X, APX-25, Super-XX, Tri-X, in Rodinol, W665, D-76 1:1, Xtol, Clayton P60, Neophen Red/Blue, T400CN in C-41, etc... ad nauseam, and there is no mistake which is which. 35mm Leica vs 4x5. Like a Featherweight boxing a Heavyweight. Hello... Bam... out! Using exacting and precision technique, 35mm Leica can perform miraculously. Using incredibly shoddy technique, 4x5 can produce crappy results. But it would take an effort to screw it up to where it looked like ordinary 35mm. And it takes a Herculean effort to produce 35mm results that could pass for LF. Unless, of course, real LF is sitting right there also, then all bets are off. Now what about color? I use Velvia in my 35 Leicas, 6x6 Hasselblad, and 4x5 Linhof/Schneider/Rodenstock/Nikkor. My 4x5 Velvia easily makes 48x60" prints that look so real that it is difficult to tell that it's not the real thing. It has not started to degrade and is the largest I can make. My 6x6 makes it to 50x50" with no loss and is the largest I can make, but Leica 35mm ASPH starts to degrade above 20x24. At 30x40 it is real obvious that it is 35mm. Jim