Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > 120 / 220 film RF's

120 / 220 film RF's 120 / 220 format rangefinders including Fuji, Koni-Omega, Mamiya Press, Linhof 6x7/6x9 cameras, Mamiya 6/7 among others, but excluding the 120 folders and the Voigtlander 667 cameras that have their own forums.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 12-16-2013   #41
Texsport
Registered User
 
Texsport's Avatar
 
Texsport is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 521
Most of the 35mm I shoot now is XPan or Widelux.

My 35mm lenses are finding more and more use on digital 35 and M43 cameras.

My favorite cameras are all 120 film - Fujica 690, Noblex 150, and Linhof 617.

Since my main focus is capturing images for wall hanging and gift giving, the 120 quality potential cannot be denied.

Texsport
__________________
"The top selling beer in America is Bud Light, followed by Budweiser, Miller Light and Natural Light. We are officially feminized". Joe Soucheray - Minneapolis, Minnesota.

This discussion is a perfect illustration of what I constantly tell my wife - you can never have enough cameras, lenses, guns, or golf clubs - oh, and diamonds, according to her! - Texsport

"That girl can make a dog break his chain!" - Justified - 2015.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2013   #42
pvdhaar
Zoom with your feet!
 
pvdhaar's Avatar
 
pvdhaar is offline
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 3,196
I've contemplated doing away with 35mm altogether and going digital+120 only. What's keeping me from carrying that through is that I can stash the Oly Stylus Infinity in a pocket, but that's something that's completely undoable with the Bronica 6x6.. at least, it is with the pockets that I have in my jackets..
__________________
Kind regards,

Peter

My Hexländer Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2013   #43
JChrome
Street Worker
 
JChrome's Avatar
 
JChrome is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 826
I have a couple of nikon SLRs that were gifts (the FM and the F3) so they will never be sold. Other than that, I only focus on 120mm format now. I did invest a good chunk of money into 135 with rangefinders at one point. But now I don't see the point. I love my 6x6 and 6x7 cameras. You can buy such amazing glass and bodies for such bargain prices that paying the same price for 135 just doesn't make sense (The plaubel or Mamiya 7 is a STEAL* compared to the Leicas).

Also... scanning 120 format on a flatbed scanner is much easier and better than 135. Did I mention developing it is easier too?
__________________
www.stillthrill.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2013   #44
mwoenv
Registered User
 
mwoenv is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Monroe, NY
Age: 64
Posts: 342
No, prints from each format have a different look so the format is selected depending on what I'm shooting.
__________________
Konica III; Konica Auto S2; Konica Autoreflex T2; Konica FS-1; Pentax 645; Yashica Mat 124; Minolta SRT201, X700, X370, XD-11, Minolta Hi-matic 7S; Olympus OM-1; Zeiss Ikon Contaflex Super BC; Nikon N80, N75
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2013   #45
JChrome
Street Worker
 
JChrome's Avatar
 
JChrome is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwoenv View Post
No, prints from each format have a different look so the format is selected depending on what I'm shooting.
Is be interested to know some of the examples and rationale behind each. Not because I want to dispute but just out of curiosity.
__________________
www.stillthrill.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2013   #46
swifty63
Fiat lux
 
swifty63 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 50
Currently shoot only MF in a Mamiya 6. I would go back to 35mm for slides though, I still have a projector, and slides in MF are such a pain!
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2013   #47
Spanik
Registered User
 
Spanik is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,425
Quote:
slides in MF are such a pain!
Until you have seen a MF slide... If there is a thing of beauty then it is a well exposed MF slide.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2013   #48
Nokton48
Registered User
 
Nokton48's Avatar
 
Nokton48 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,178
"With that in mind, to me the best remaining use of film is to make very high quality large format images that even a high-rez Phase or Hasselblad can't match".

I am returning to handheld large format, with my Plaubel Makiflexes. Not that I still won't use 35mm film for some things......... 9x9cm has definate advantages over my Hasselblads, and is surprisingly portable. And SO much fun to shoot. Used to use a 4x5" Graflex Super D and it's about the same buzz just much better shooting experience.

And it also takes 120 film Makina Holders and 6x9cm plates. Right now one of my Makina rollholders is loaded with Delta 3200. This is something new to me.
__________________
“The secret of getting ahead is getting started.”
― Mark Twain
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-17-2013   #49
clcolucci58
Registered User
 
clcolucci58 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Youngstown ohio
Posts: 121
80% 120 and getting closer to 100%. Bought a Mamiya 645 with 80mm lens and fell in love with medium format. Have since added a 150mm lens and a 45mm wide angle lens. Just enjoy shooting with the camera.

Regards
clc
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2013   #50
Peter_S
Registered User
 
Peter_S is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Narvik (Norway); Tbilisi (Georgia)
Posts: 738
Thanks again for the additional thoughts and input.
I will take the GF670 as main camera on my next project, but also keep the M6 - the main reason is that I want to re-enter wide-angle photography, and here 135 shines.
The GF670 and an M6 + 25mm Biogon seems like a capable combination for landscape projects that include some documentary work with environmental portraits.

Thanks!!
Peter
__________________
Black Contax T3
Bessa III
Fuji XT1 + VM Ultron F/1.8 21mm + VM Nokton f/1.2 40mm
Beater Leica X1



www.ps-photo.net
On instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2013   #51
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
I don't think anything can replace the convenience of 35mm, but lately I have found some joy in shooting Bronica RF, which is surprisingly portable and works very well in the street. The 645 format in general is a great compromise between the eminently portable 35mm cameras, and mainly tripod driven 6x6 and 6x7 formats.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2013   #52
lxmike
Barnack fan
 
lxmike's Avatar
 
lxmike is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Co Durham NE England
Age: 53
Posts: 3,245
I shoot with both formats, I like carrying a small compact such as a Rollei 35, but also shoot regularly with my Mamiya C3
__________________
Currently loaded: Leica IIIc. IIIg and Bronica ERTS.

Glass currently in regular use: Voigtlander 15mm 4.5 Helliar

Soon to arrive Leica MDa

myblog:lifefromawindow
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2013   #53
Rodchenko
Olympian
 
Rodchenko's Avatar
 
Rodchenko is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Exiled from Hyperborea
Posts: 2,990
I did go completely mf from a set up including rangefinders and SLRs. I had a Fuji GS645S, and used 220 film *sigh* It was great for everything, including family photos. I love the 645 format.

Sadly, we were burgled, and the Fuji was gone, never to be properly replaced.

With only 120 available, I'm not sure that I'd make the transition again, unless I were using a 645 SLR with interchangeable backs, and had a spare loaded and ready to swap. But that makes a bulky package. The only other way I'd think about going would be a folder like a Bessa III or GS645 folder, which would sit in a pocket, and overcome one inconvenience with that availability.
__________________
Auspicious Light on Mount Takachiho
E-PL1
35SP





  Reply With Quote

Old 12-27-2013   #54
whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
 
whitecat's Avatar
 
whitecat is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,362
I do both and let me give a slight plug for one of my favorite medium format cameras that will not break the bank. Try a Zeiss Nettar. Cheap but a fantastic lens.
__________________
My Gallery



Zeiss Ikon Zm, Olympus Trip, Rolleiflex FX, Yashica Electro 35, Nikon 35 TI, Nikon 28 TI, Widelux F7, Contax TVS III, Zeiss Ikon 35, Minox, Olympus 35 EE3, Konica AA 35, Minox 35 GT, Canonet QL17, and many more....
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-28-2013   #55
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is online now
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrumsick View Post
Is be interested to know some of the examples and rationale behind each. Not because I want to dispute but just out of curiosity.
I don't have any side-by-side examples but the final image difference between formats is due to working distance, tonal range, lens design and DOF.

Take a ~75-90mm lens on a 6x7 camera which is a "normal" vs. a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera. The longer focal length has inherently less depth of field BUT due to a lesser enlargement factor to get the same size print, the COC of the medium format image works in your favor and the apparent DOF in the final print widens just a little bit.

If you crop out exactly 24x36mm in the center of a medium format frame the medium format lens' focal length is exactly the same as the 35mm lens' focal length with regard to the final print. A lens is a lens though and it doesn't know or care what it is projecting light upon so the DOF is a rigid constant with regard to focal length, regardless of format. It is the reproduction ratio, final enlargement and viewing distance which lend a difference to DOF

Now, the 6x7 is a tighter crop being closer to 4:5 ratio while the 35mm is a 2:3 ratio so a 6x9 camera is a better comparison for non-cropped final images but most miniature format folks doing printing are cropping the 35mm frame to suit the 8x10 paper and so the 6x7 medium format comparison is completely relevant.

Your working distance with a 6x7 camera is usually greater than a 35mm camera. Now, the eminent Mamiya RB and RZ 67 cameras kind of set the bar for this format in SLR use because there are so many of them, they are inexpensive (now) and the lenses are fantastic. The reason I bring this system up is that the camera has a built-in macro bellows so you can get much closer.

That system aside, shooting a medium format camera up close is rather like shooting a rangefinder up close as they tend to have longer close-focus working distances with standard lenses. This distance affects the DOF far more than final print enlargement ratio so that ~75-90mm lens on the medium format camera tends to settle back down closer to the drawing characteristics of a 50mm lens in 35mm format.

In spite of that the medium format system tends to draw a little more "three dimensionally" due to the longer focal length lenses ability to more selectively focus at natural looking apertures. This is why a lot of folks didn't (and still don't) like APS sized sensors. One the wide angle side, the DOF is about the same shooting a 28mm lens for example, but the angle of view is much closer to a normal lens.

Then there's tonal range. The medium format lenses tend to be much older, mature designs that draw with a very long tonal range and allow the shooter to tailor the image more than a very modern, higher contrast formulation. This and the fact that the sheer surface area of the medium format film allows tonality that is hard to get out of 35mm frames.

Ok, I'm just rambling now. Geeking out on lens design and format.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-28-2013   #56
Lucadomi
Registered User
 
Lucadomi's Avatar
 
Lucadomi is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 198
I prefer 120 and gave up 35mm few times.
I see myself going back to 35mm rangefinders for portability end spontaneity of use.
I like to keep a camera in my bag all the time. Even Oly XA is fine.
I am now considering a small 6x4.5 folder for that use instead of a 35mm.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-28-2013   #57
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
@Ansel
I have too many, but lately I have found some joy shooting very compact cameras - Bessa R4A or Pentax ME Super.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-28-2013   #58
biomed
Registered User
 
biomed's Avatar
 
biomed is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Seattle Area (North)
Posts: 3,397
In the late 1960s I sold all of my 35mm gear and went totally MF. First with the Kowa Six. I traded the Kowa in for a Mamiya RB67. I used the RB67 for a number of years. Magnificent camera but very large and heavy. I also started some 4x5 work during that time. After carrying the RB67 around for weddings and places like Yellowstone, I sold it and the 4x5 in 1973. I purchased a Nikon F2 which became my primary camera. I later found a used C330 that was eventually destroyed in an accident. I do miss the larger size of MF now and then. I have been able to resist MF GAS. Truth be told, I don't think I will ever own any MF gear again.

Mike
__________________
biomed
Things are more like they are now than they’ve ever been before.

2016 Photos

rff Gallery

Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2013   #59
robert blu
quiet photographer
 
robert blu's Avatar
 
robert blu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Italy
Age: 70
Posts: 5,700
@ Phil F NM : interesting explanation, thanks. When I shoot my Rolleiflex I see a difference in the print compared to similar photo shot with a 35mm camera but I was not able to explain it in a rational way. Your post gives me a more exact view on it. Time now to try the toy that Santa brought me a few days ago: a Zeiss Ikonta!
robert
__________________
Remember: today is the Day !
from Ruth Bernhard recipe for a long and happy life

my quiet photographer's blog

My RFF photos and my albums on RFF
  Reply With Quote

120 format
Old 12-29-2013   #60
heller
Registered User
 
heller is offline
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 13
120 format

There is no 35mm equipment left in my arsenal.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2013   #61
littleearth
Registered User
 
littleearth is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 170
I'm now down to one 35mm camera, that I'm keeping for sentimental reasons only !

There is only one way I would go back to 35mm film photography, wich is finding a great deal on a Pakon F135 scanner !
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-29-2013   #62
darya151
Registered User
 
darya151 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 132
Anyone using Pentax 67 these days? The lenses are great!
Darya
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2014   #63
EastNeuk
Registered User
 
EastNeuk is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 58
It was only 35mm until I switched to digital, something that came somewhat late in the game for me. After a few years of shooting digital, I'm now shooting mostly medium format film.There are applications for which I like 35mm or the Sigma DP3M. I don't have a difficult time envisioning travelling only with 120 equipment, however. I'll have a wet darkroom set up for black and white in about a month, and at that point I may well just use 120 for a while and see how it goes.

Last edited by EastNeuk : 02-02-2014 at 02:12. Reason: Replaced MF digital with 'medium format film'
  Reply With Quote

MF and LF years now for personal...
Old 02-01-2014   #64
kuzano
Registered User
 
kuzano is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,953
MF and LF years now for personal...

I'll keep this short which will surprise everyone who's read my posts Before.

I quit shooting 135 about fifteen years ago to go MF, all formats.

Only 135 film I have purchased, has been to test 35mm camera's I buy to sell on eBay. Been doing that for 15 years now with great results.

Have done digital over the last 10 years about 25% of my personal shooting.

Just sold the last digital I hope to own, and shipped it away three days ago.

Have two Travelwide 4X5's coming from the Kickstarter project this last year.

Shoot personally Fujica GL 690 6X9

Would consider going back to 135 like going to half frame, or 16mm/8mm spy cams.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2014   #65
Markus
Registered User
 
Markus is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 57
My first film-Camera was a EOS 3, because I use the EOS-System and thought it would be a good a idea to get a fullframe camera. My digital camera at that point a was APS-C-based camera. After a few rolls, I sold it. Than I got a ZEISS NETTAR 6x6 folder. After developing the first roll I started loving MF. Since the ZEISS NETTAR has no light metering or focussing-system I wanted to have a camera that included all this. The Contax 645 found its away to me with 3 lenses: 35mm, 80mm and 140mm. At this point, I learned a lot more about photography and stopped worrying about ISO and so on. At this time I got my tripod and loaded with Velvia 100F this camera was fun - I think it was the best SLR I ever owned. During the Photokina 2012 I played a lot with Linhofs and Sinars and all the GF-stuff and soon I decided to go for a larger format. But this decision was difficult and as a result I sold my Contax 645 and got a Mamiya 7 with again three lenses: 43mm, 50mm, 80mm. I'm addicted to 21mm in Smallformat or 90° of view. The Mamiya 7 is not as advanced as the Contax 645 is, but it has a larger format and good (excellent) image quality.

The decision to switch to 120 was pretty easy for me. 120 gives me a lot more image quality. The size and weight of my equipment negligible for me.
Keeping in mind, that one roll of 135 Provia 100F costs 10.70€, one roll of 120 Provia 100F about 6€, a pack of 5 rolls 29.50€. I usually buy packs of 5 rolls.
With my Mamiya 7 I get 10 shots per roll. You could say, that 10 shots is few compared to 36 shots on 135, but in landscape photography 10 shots is just enough for one scene including some exposure compensations. So I can finish my work on one scene and change rolls more often and this lets me change my setup for each scene. With 135 and 36 shots the film remains much longer in the camera.

So 120 is not cheaper in the costs/image ratio but in the costs/area ratio. Im also more capable of dealing with the lesser number of shots.

EDIT: My only 135 camera is a Contax G2. I won't sell it because for me it is a unique camera. I wish Canon would learn a few things from this camera, especially looking at the EOS M
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2014   #66
shortstop
Registered User
 
shortstop's Avatar
 
shortstop is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 524
Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Borger View Post
i do not know if i made a complete transition, but i did not shoot 35mm for a year now. My main camera.s are Contax 645, Hasselblad and Mamiya 7. I already sold my Leica gear and invested it in Contax and Hasselblad. I still have a Nikon F3 with 3 lenses but am consisering to sell it for a Contax T2 or T3, for the reasons you mention. Since i shoot less with 120 i print all my pictures on fiber in the darkroom these days and skip the scanning. Getting my own enlarger this year for almost nothing was the best investment i made in a long time. For darkroom printing i still think 35mm is valid, because you can get a very different look with it, but i will not go back to scanning 35mm.
I have a T3 always in my backpack. The negatives are indistinguishable from those obtained with the Nikkor. a bit 'sharper. my favorite is a MF 3.5 f.
  Reply With Quote

Re: 35mm vs 120
Old 02-06-2014   #67
jwanerman
Registered User
 
jwanerman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 16
Re: 35mm vs 120

I sold my Leica M2 and M6 because all that I was using was my Mamiya M6 and Rolleiflex 3.5F. I keep a Retina IIIc for special occasions, but when I want the best, most portable handheld image possible, nothing compares to medium format. The Leicas were wonderful machines, but I do not miss them.
  Reply With Quote

Planning
Old 02-11-2014   #68
peot
Peot
 
peot's Avatar
 
peot is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: sweden
Age: 58
Posts: 90
Planning

My photography challenge this year will be - less digital and more YashicaMat 124G and Rolleicord!
__________________
[font=Garamond]
Minox 35 GL FED 5V Fed 2 Zorki 4 Ricoh 500G (2) Minolta AF-C (3) Canon A35 F (3) Yashica 35 GSN,GS Konica C35 automatic (2) Minolta Hi-matic F (2) Minolta Himatic AF-2 Minolta SR-7, Minolta XG-2 Minolta Dynax 5 Nikon F-301 Minolta XD-7 Agfa Optima 335 electronic Ricoh 500 Zeiss Ikon Nettar Zeiss Ikon Contessamat Olympus XA Olympus EEs Olympus 35 DC
Rolleicord V Yashicamat 124 G Panasonic Lumix GF, Panasonic Lumix GX, Sona Alpha A 330, Sony Alpha A-850
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #69
dtcls100
Registered User
 
dtcls100 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 452
Not yet. I use Olympus OM, Olympus 35SP rangefinder, Nikon FM3a, Nikon FE2, and Mamiya 6. The Mamiya unquestionably gives better image quality, but I still use 35mm more because most of my photos are candids where speed is important, or require more than 12 shots at a time, or require long lenses. If 220 film were more available, the 24 shots available would be more convenient. The Mamiya gets used for landscapes and setup shots.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #70
philipus
ʎɐpɹəʇɥƃıɹq looɟɹəʇƃıɹq
 
philipus's Avatar
 
philipus is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: '(,,,,)°l°
Posts: 1,034
I will be going (also) MF soon. I have lots of 120 film (slide) in the freezer and a scanner that can handle this format but just can't find any decent Mamiya 6 here in Europe. Really annoying. I've considered Hasselblad and Rollei but want RF for now.
__________________
philipus.com

Camera position: In general as shown in Fig. H and J, but according to requirements other positions are also possible or more practical.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #71
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 65
Posts: 3,108
I truly enjoy shooting medium format but I could never see me abandoning 35mm. There are too many awesome films to use and too many great cameras and lenses to use.
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138779
Old 02-12-2014   #72
leicapixie
Registered User
 
leicapixie is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto.Canada
Posts: 1,577
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138779

I see things very differently.
I did pro photography, mainly newspapers, magazines.
I also did Fashion, Publicity and Advertising.
I moved to the streets, to record a nation in transition.
History was happening! I needed 35mm.
I was often given Assignments not because I made the best prints,
the most detailed or best tonal range.
I made dynamic, exciting images.
120 Film is sedentary.
The quality is there. In bucket loads.
135mm is superb for capturing moments and movement.
Digital easily replaces both, again my opinion.
Peter S has shown some really nice stuff with an X2.
Getting a hernia carrying MF or huge white lenses, is not needed.
I am retired. I can no longer carry a Mamiya RB/RZ rig and lenses.
My Pentax 6x7 with a few lenses had a bag, i almost could sleep in, if emptied.
My Leica-M is still used regularly.
My main camera, used everyday and on the few gigs, a Point and Shoot digital.
Oh! I still have a Rollei Automat.It has film in it.
Another few more months, I will have finished the roll!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #73
Landberg
Registered User
 
Landberg is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 735
I'm looking for a mamiya 6 and I think that camera could make me do a switch!
__________________
Instagram @landberg
rikardlandberg.com
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #74
Vics
Registered User
 
Vics's Avatar
 
Vics is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 3,289
I have moved almost entirely from MF to 35mm. When I finally sell my last Rollei, that'll be it.
__________________
Vic
Sony a200

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #75
nosmok
Registered User
 
nosmok is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 57
I have a lot of 120 gear and love it, am trying to get a 4x5 point and shoot rig together between kids and jobs. Love the bigger negatives, BUT---

I have laid in a large supply of Panatomic-X film, mostly in 135 format. The experience of shooting this film-- my choice for greatest consumer product ever-- will keep me on 135 till it is all gone. FX135 + Olympus XA is an unbeatable combination for its physical size to image quality ratio.

It's also the best 125 asa film I've ever used when pushed 2 stops. Gonna try 250 and see what happens.

A guy on another forum said that when he ran out of FX135, he had to go to 4x5 to get the quality he wanted. I agree.

--nosmok
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #76
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 71
Posts: 2,503
I have done the reverse.

Gone from 120 to 35mm!
__________________
I make photographs as a return ticket to a moment otherwise gone.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #77
Noll
Registered User
 
Noll's Avatar
 
Noll is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 493
A couple years ago I was going that direction but a had a few realizations along the way.

In terms of overall IQ I am far more scanner-limited (Epson V500) than negative-size limited. Especially with B&W film, there is more detail there than I'd ever thought. I find it easier to use a macro lens and digital camera to scan 35mm than 120 on a flatbed. Below is a cheap 35mm film (Arista Edu 100), camera-scanned somewhere around 5000-6000 dpi and a 100% crop:




This is more detail than I could pull off with my V500 on a 6x6 cm negative, and I suspect might compare well to the output from a Monochrom . Of course, if I did the same procedure on a 120 neg, stitching 8 images together, I'd be looking at potential for wall-sized prints (but that's not nearly as easy to pull off).

I use MF for when I want to be really "serious" - especially with color, but quite often the quality of 35mm is more than good enough, cost is lower, and more convenient than MF. How many 24" x 36" prints are we all making anyway?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2014   #78
hamradio
Registered User
 
hamradio is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: duluth, minn.
Posts: 409
I'm now finding myself moving away from my medium format gear, to a 4x5 setup.

A slippery slope, it is.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2014   #79
hamradio
Registered User
 
hamradio is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: duluth, minn.
Posts: 409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noll View Post
A couple years ago I was going that direction but a had a few realizations along the way.

In terms of overall IQ I am far more scanner-limited (Epson V500) than negative-size limited. Especially with B&W film, there is more detail there than I'd ever thought. I find it easier to use a macro lens and digital camera to scan 35mm than 120 on a flatbed. Below is a cheap 35mm film (Arista Edu 100), camera-scanned somewhere around 5000-6000 dpi and a 100% crop:

What exactly is the rig you're using? A piece of frosted glass behind the negative, a strobe of some sort firing behind the glass, and a DSLR with macro lens? This seems like it may be a decent option in my quest for 35mm scanning that isn't crap; the results from my Epson 4490 flatbed on 35mm are frustrating at best.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2014   #80
Noll
Registered User
 
Noll's Avatar
 
Noll is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by hamradio View Post
What exactly is the rig you're using? A piece of frosted glass behind the negative, a strobe of some sort firing behind the glass, and a DSLR with macro lens? This seems like it may be a decent option in my quest for 35mm scanning that isn't crap; the results from my Epson 4490 flatbed on 35mm are frustrating at best.
I posted about my setup in this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=133031

One thing I didn't mention there is that it's crucial to use a small mirror to be used during setup to make sure that the camera sensor is parallel to the film. It works great to align the center of the lens in the center of the viewfinder.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:01.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.