[Leica] Re: Leica Quality versus Medium Format

[leica@rakitzis.com]

Tony Salce:
>I came across a lovely Rolleiflex 3.5F for a very reasonable priceand am
>thinking of purchasing it.. I've not used medium format before and I'm
>wondering whether users of Medium Format on this lsit could comment about
>the pros and cons of having a 35mm system and a medium format system.

>I do not plan doing big enlargements and perhaps that is one of the primary
>reasons for getting into medium format. Some would argue however that with
>the quality of leica lenses you do not require medium format. Having said
>that square photos have some appeal.

Here's my 2cents:

I often print 6x6cm negatives full-frame onto 7x7in squares on a piece
of 8x10in paper, and in my belief the medium format tonality shines
through even on these small enlargements.

Of course if you want to put the camera on a tripod, and shoot 100 Delta
or some other fine-grained film, then you can make outstanding enlargements.
(and whoever says that Leica lenses are equivalent to medium format is
engaging in an exercise of wishful thinking)

A Rollei TLR is QUIETER than a Leica, and the right-angle viewing probably
makes it more discreet as well.

A Rollei in its everready case is a true traveller's camera: the case
flips open very easily for use, but it also affords a lot of protection
against bumps and scrapes.  When I'm on the road this is often the only
camera I bring.

I'm trying to think of downsides to the TLR, but it's hard: obviously,
there are no interchangable lenses. The shutter is vibration-free, but
it's tricky to hand-hold the camera at waist-level for "available light"
shots -- perhaps a prism would make things easier here.

Buy it!

Byron.