Joe, This is part of the reason I chose 67 over 645 - I like my 35mm stuff and have quite an investment. I felt that I would be able to choose on a case by case basis whether it was 35 or 67 and that it would be pretty obvious. The 645 made me feel that I would almost always pick the 645 even when the 35 would have been good enough.
You can get some 67 stuff reasonably priced by going used. I believe JCO has done pretty well that way. Bruce Dayton Sunday, March 10, 2002, 6:06:35 PM, you wrote: JT> Or, I wish I hadn't done that. JT> In younger days, 1967 I think, I bought a used Rolleicord with a 75mm. JT> f3.5 Schneider Kreuznach Xenar. I used it a lot at first, then not so JT> much as I drifted away from photography for a few years. The last time JT> it was used was during a trip to Italy in 1991. Recently I had some of JT> the negatives from that trip scanned to a Kodak PhotoCD. JT> Yes, 6x7ers, I do see the difference in image sharpness, even though JT> this was a less expensive model. So now the question is: Did I really JT> want to know this? I am too heavily invested in 35 and like it's JT> versatility. I'm not set up to scan medium format. I'm saving to enable JT> myself into the 31 Limited. JT> I'm not going to get back into medium format. I'm not, I'm not, I'm not JT> (saying this as I click my heels together, like Dorothy). Well, maybe JT> I'll think about getting the old Rollei CLA'd. It's currently JT> non-functional. JT> And I really do like my PZ-1ps. And I often I need to show 35 mm. slides JT> the old fashioned way - on a projector. JT> Anyone else had this dilemma? I'll bet Cotty will have someting witty to JT> say. JT> Joe - 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 .
