On Nov 18, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
What I was thinking of is a camera with standard lens, preferably
fixed lens. I have eyed some Fuji models. I want something that is
reasonably light, with good quality and reasonable versatility...
...
As for what Frank suggested... I've seen some shots made with
YashicaMat... They did not impress me really. The lens was probably
very simple triplet variety. It was sharp but I am not after
bleeding sharpness...
...
Over the years of shooting film, I've switched back and forth between
35mm and medium format several times.
The YashicaMat 124G was a decent camera ... I seem to recall that the
earlier ones had a 4-element Tessar type lens, where the last series
had been cost-reduced with a relatively poor Triotar type design.
Mine was 1981 vintage and was certainly sharp enough when stopped
down appropriately (f/11-f/16 is pretty normal for this kind of
camera). That said, the 1954 Rolleiflex MX-EVS I replaced it with in
1982 had a FAR better Zeiss Tessar f/3.5 lens and took photos that
were greatly superior.
I had the Mamiya 1000S 645 SLR around that same time, and later had
both a pair of Zeiss Ikon Super Ikontas (A and B variety) as well as
a Fuji GA645. My last Rolleiflexes were a very late model 3.5F and a
'51 Tessar f/3.5 MX. My last medium format cameras were a pair of
Hasselblads, a '92 500C/M with Planar 80/2.8 and a '93 903SWC (Biogon
38mm f/4.5). I sold that last one, my favorite of them all, at the
end of 2004 just before I bought the Pentax DS.
All were very good cameras and turned extremely good photos. The Fuji
GA645 has a very good lens, super crisp, but I always prefer the
rendering with the Zeiss lensed cameras. The Hassy SWC's Biogon is
just a phenomenally wonderful lens.
That said, I'd have to say the greatest number of my favorite
photographs in medium format were made with the Rolleiflexes.
Something about them just "works right". They're amazingly versatile
despite being a fixed lens camera with an only modest speed, simple
lens. From portraits to scenics, they just keep on returning the
goods...
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW2/20.htm
And they're rugged, can take an enormous beating. And reasonably
priced. I think I paid $120 for the '51 MX (bought it about 1996)
from a local store, then had it cleaned and a custom (Maxwell
focusing screen) fitted for another $180. Superb camera. A friend in
Tokyo bought it from me in 2002 and is still using it today.
Godfrey
