Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2016/06/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I got a lot of input from all kinds of photographers because I printed in a rental color lab every week. Usually Thursdays. U Develop it was called. And there were people constantly pulling contact sheets out of the Kreonite processor with three rows of 4 square frames on them. Not just me. I was not in the minority. The 645 guys and gals were in the minority. They were the upstarts. They got no respect. This was Portland Oregon in the 9o's and 80's. You could print your color just like you could your black and white. Make contact sheets. Show them to your client. Go back and print big ones. Dodge and burn. Lots of input from all kinds of photographer doing all kinds of subject matter with all kinds of cameras. It closed this year. The 645 cameras had everything an SLR had. Autofocus Auto exposure Eye level viewing I brought an A16 back to every event for formal shots as they worked better than squares for large groups and 16 instead of 12 on a roll was welcome. Actually I mainly used A24 backs and shot 220 which was a double roll. 24 squares on a roll. On 6/25/16 6:02 PM, "Frank Filippone" <red735i at verizon.net> wrote: > Most of the 645 cameras were models made for eye level viewing, like an > SLR. I > think that feature alone domimated the thought process of manufacturers and > users... A big negative SLR. There were exceptions, including the Fuji foldup > 645, and Plaubel Makina, probably others. But the waist level Rollei and > Hasselblad and others went dead. Eye level prisms were available, but adde > to > weight. In fairness, the waist level cameras were heavy, the eye level ones > comparatively light None of this explains why the square format was > discarded. Note that Phase (or was it Leaf) did offer a square format digital > sensor for a while. No longer, however. Frank Sent from my iPad On Jun 25, > 2016, at 3:12 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: I don't get the > square format medium format cameras dead statement. None of those cameras went > under. Hasselblad, Rolleiflex and a few others. 645 remained a bargain > basement medium format for people who had to feel like they were shooting 35. > Square format Hasselblads dominated wedding and event shooting till the > end. > On 6/22/16 9:17 PM, "Frank Filippone" <red735i at verizon.net> wrote: > > > Sometime in the long ago, some marketing guy thought the rather obscure > 645 > size ( remember the A16 Hassy back?) was MF. At that time, there was > 6x6 and > 645. ( and 6x7; 6x9; and even 6x8). All the numbers referred to > film size in > mm. They all used a common 120 film size. Then someone thought > that 6x6 was > a dead end and there were no more 6x6 cameras being made. They > were all > 645....the other sizes went dead. So magically, 645 became the MF > standard > (and only size). With the advent of digital, 645 became a ratio > (4:3), not a > mm size, and so now we have digital MF sensors that measure > 44x33mm There are > larger sensors.... But none measure 56x56 mm, the old > time MF standard We can > only hope some sensor in the future will measure > 56x56mm. My CF lenses will > cover the sensor, easily. Frank Sent from my > iPad On Jun 22, 2016, at > 6:58 PM, lluisripollphotography > <lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> > wrote: Neither for me I think, I don?t > like operate on cameras in Menu mode > neither with EVF, on the other hand > this one is not exactly a MF camera, IMHO > it is equivalent to a smaller 4,5 > x 6, the CMOS sensor is 43.8 ? 32.9mm, for > me the true MF (at least in film) > is 60 x 60 mm (2 1/4" x 2 > 1/4?). Lluis > El 22 juny 2016, a les 23:16, > Frank Verizon 2 2016 > <red735i at verizon.net> va escriure: > > Appears to be a > Leica SL on steroids, > at a discount store price. > Does 2 lenses sound > familiar? > No zoom yet, no > H lens adapter yet. > Fully electronic lens to > body connections mean that > CF,C, and F lenses will not work, unless they > make a special adapter > available > > It is substantially lighter than my > Leaf + 500CM system, a good > thing. > > I am unconvinced it is a path for > me. > > Frank Filippone > > > <http://www.hasselblad.com/x1d> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See > > http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more > > information _______________________________________________ Leica Users > > Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more > > information _______________________________________________ Leica Users > > Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more > information -- Mark William > Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ __________ > _____________________________________ Leica Users Group. See > http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more > information _______________________________________________ Leica Users > Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/