----- Original Message ----- From: gfen Subject: Re: Oh, 645! revisited: 645x67.
> > The flash sync issue is pretty much a non starter for me anyway. > > There is only a stop difference between the 6x7 and 645 > > shutters. Neither body is especially good for outdoor fill > > I can handhold 1/60 @75mm with the 645 (at least, I believe I can), > however, there's no way I could handhold 1/30 @105mm with the 67. Thats what tripods were invented for. I have used the 6x7 handheld with flash (Metz 60 series) with excellent results, so it can be done. You may still be thinking in terms of 35mm, where everything has to be just about perfect to get results that are aceptable. 35mm is surprisingly difficult to get good results from, and pretty much impossible to get excellent results from, presuming maximum image sharpness, detail and lack of granularity are the results you are after.... If you don't mind these shortcomings, then all is well. The small negative introduces too many constraints in other areas to make it acceptable when ultimate technical quality is desired. Medium format has fewer constraints. You have probably seen proof prints or slides from 35mm that look good, but fall apart when blown up to 8x10. A 4x5 proof is only a 2x magnification for 6x7, and about a 2.5x magnification for 6x4.5. Less magnification means more compromises can be made in other areas and still get results that are acceptable on paper. People also seem to think that because the camera is heavy, it is more difficult to handhold, when, in fact, just the opposite is true, The heavier the camera, the more hand holdable it becomes. > > There are times I can forsee not having a waist level will be mildly > detrimential, but overall, I never wanted to use my YM124G because it only > had a WL. Mostly, I use the eye level prism. There are times when the waist level makes more sense. The 6x7 meter prism weight about a pound and a quarter or some such. It's adds significantly to the weight, so if I am using the 6x7, but trying to travel light, I use the waist level and a Gossen. > > > if the Bronica glass is that inferior to the newer Pentax glass. > > Bronica lenses are made by Nikon, are they not? Good question. The older Bronica glass was Nikkor, I am pretty sure the lens I had for the ETRs (circa 1980) was a Zeiss. For all I know now, they may be Tamron. William Robb
