On 26 Jan 2002 at 16:44, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > Once you consider the cost of the body PLUS > 5 or 6 lenses ,the 67 system is way less > expensive. And besides the 67 negative is > about 50% bigger than the 645 so that much > less grain.
Hi Bruce, As you said, there isn't much difference in prints up to 16 x 20, the 645 is a lot lighter and more portable, has far less mirror shake, it is motorized, provides more frames per roll, has a similar aspect ratio to 35mm, has program and aperture priority if required and handles IMHO much more like a modern SLR. The negatives of the 645 system are that the film size might be a little more restricting if you want to crop, the motor is noisy, no mirror lock (until 645NII) and the lenses seem a little more difficult to come by used, need a separate film insert to use 220 film and the film flatness issues. I am sure that there are more but these are the main ones from my perspective. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - 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 .
