67 cost me MORE than 4X5. 4X5 is three times larger than 67. I dont feel $2500 is alot, I got SIX high quality lenses. Hardly a "starter" outfit. JCO
> -----Original Message----- > From: collinb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 7:12 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: 35mm SUCKS! Try 4X5 > > > Even up to 16x20 it's not easy to see the diff, if one can at > all, with Acros. > 6x7 is almost LF and is pretty inexpensive for what one gets. > > I must say, too, that JCO spent a lot to start with 4x5. > One can get a nice outfit for less than $1000US. > > Collin > > At 04:21 AM 3/27/03 -0500, you wrote: > >Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 21:44:20 -0600 > >From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Mostly, I agree. > >In print sizes up to 11x14 there is no significant quality difference > >between 6x7 and 4x5. > > > >William Robb > >
