Paul wrote:
> Do you notice any different between your shots with the 645 and your 35mm
> when they arnt blown up toa huge size?
Yes. If you need huge size of prints to spot the difference they you're really judging
the quality of the print process, not the original.
I contrast to common belief its really not resolution that "makes" a MF image of 35mm.
Its the larger and smoother tonality is what really makes the difference. I shot
countless of MF and 35mm side by side and it never fail to amaze me of much more
impact the MF chrome has. The are many example of where the 35mm slide its just OK
where the same image on MF jumps out at you.
There are landscape photographers who have made a carrier based on the 35mm format.
What they do is honing their vision to fit the format. That is, exploiting simple,
graphic design and loud colors. This appoach is OK. However, another posibility is to
let the vision dictate the format. MF open up posibilities; there are images that
simply don't work as well in smaller format. Particularly landscape images that lend
themselves to visual exploring.
The fact that a Pentax 645n system covering focal length from approximately 20mm to
200mm (in 35mm terms) can be had at the same weight as a high-end 35mm system, is a
deciding factor for me. In spite of the virtues of 35mm, MF open up image
posibilities.
Pål
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
