Tom,

That is certainly what I saw on the wall.  Big jump from 35mm to 645.
Very minor improvement from 645 to 67.  Mind you that enlargements
were 16 X 20 and perhaps going larger would start to show more
difference between 645 and 67.


Bruce Dayton



Saturday, January 26, 2002, 3:13:34 PM, you wrote:

a> OTOH, I just took the following quote from
a> http://people.smu.edu/rmonagha/mf/formats.html.

a> It doesn't change my mind, 645 vs. 67, but is still interesting.

a> "Quality Factors - 6x4.5 vs. 6x6 vs. 6x7
a>       Ernst Wildi in his Medium Format Advantage book notes (on p.28) that
a> the
a>       6x4.5cm vs. 6x6cm cropped rectangular images printed at 8x10" both
a> have to
a>       be enlarged by a factor of 4.6X. Using a 6x7cm (56mm x 68mm) image,
a> the
a>       rectangle has to be enlarged only 3.8X, a difference of only 20%. By
a>       comparison, the area of the 6x7cm image is 60% greater than the
a> 6x4.5cm
a>       (or cropped 6x6cm) rectangle. It is the longest side length which
a>       determines enlargement factors, rather than the relative area of the
a> two
a>       images. This result is counter-intuitive; the much (60%+) larger area
a>       6x7cm image only provides circa 20%+ extra enlargement overhead or
a>       quality. This factor helps explain why there is such a large
a> improvement
a>       in quality in going from 35mm to medium format, but relatively modest
a>       differences between quality of different medium format sizes."

a> Tom C.

a> ----- Original Message -----
a> From: "Bruce Dayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
a> To: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
a> Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 3:48 PM
a> Subject: Re[2]: P67II or P645n


>> Paul,
>>
>> While I agree with your statement, at 16 X 20, it was very simple to
>> see the difference between 35mm and 645, but not very easy to see the
>> difference between 645 and 67.  But the weight and handling of the 645
>> were much nicer.  I'm not saying that the 67II felt bad or overly
>> clumsy, but the 645 didn't feel much more cumbersome than a big 35mm.
>>
>>
>> Bruce
a> -
a> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List.  To unsubscribe,
a> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
a> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
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 .

Reply via email to