you will never be happy with 35mm. Even a 5000$ Leica kit you won't be happy..[/QUOTE said:I don't totally agree with the "you will never be happy with 35mm" statement. It all depends on how big you want to print? I was is kind of the same boat as Merg only I'm keeping my large and medium format stuff, but was downsizing all my 35mm goodies. I still have many 35mm cameras to unload, but wanted one system that was small enough, light enough, simple enough and most of all, optically good enough. I picked up two Contax G1 bodies for almost nothing and added a flash, 28mm, 45mm and the 90mm. All I can say is I'm very, very satisfied with what I have and the image quality is as good as any Leica I have ever owned and I have owned a few. I went with the G1 bodies as I wasn't sure if I'd like the system or not and I'd have little invested that way. I might get a couple of G2 bodies further down the line, but like I said, I'm a happy camper for now. I have made 11x14 prints that are just fine for my standards. If you use a slow film(PanF+, Delta, Acros, Tmax) you can possibly go larger, but 35mm does start to fall apart, for me at least, above 11x14. The Contax lenses are not the problem, it's the 35mm negative size that is. I've heard people talk about beautiful, grain-free 16x20 or larger prints from 35mm, but I could never manage it. I suppose that if I had only ever used 35mm I might say the same, but I look at the larger formats and know they are just not the same when you are talking a 10x enlargement. Different strokes for different folks I guess!
He used a Fuji 6x7 on his last trip. He must be used to a rangefinder?I would think an SLR since you are not used to a rangefinder. I would want a fast lens since likely will be some indoor shots. TMax 100 and a monopod or mini tripod should give very nice prints.
He used a Fuji 6x7 on his last trip. He must be used to a rangefinder?
Even knowing you don't "need" auto focus I'm still going to suggest an F100 with a 50 1.8 AF/D lens.Thanks for taking the time to respond. No real preference to SLR vs rangefinder. Would prefer a single lens, do not need autofocus. Nikon seems highly thought of and on my list. A "normal" lens has more appeal for my work than wide angle.
Thanks for the kind comment, yes I have always done my own printing, gelatin silver....a process I have no plans to abandon!
The Olympus XA is certainly great for color photography, but for black & white (what the OP plans to do), not so much. Its lens lacks threading for screw-on filters, and push-on filters are not possible with it either. An ideal camera for black and white photography should at least give you the option for easy filter attachment.Another vote for the Olympus XA, superb quality images, slips in a small pocket, unobtrusive, easy to use, inexpensive. If I was considering SLR I would go with a Nikon FE, but now you also have to carry a bag of lenses :-(
Mamiya6Long time (60 years) with large format. Making short trip to Europe, want to shoot film. Last trip used Fuji 6x7, excellent results. However, looking for something less bulky, thinking 35mm. Small enlargements, no landscapes, black and white. Camera, suggestions? Thanks.
www.mergross.com
I agree and like mine but no match for MFWell, all you're going to get are other people's opinions. Nothing wrong w/ that, but the thing is, what I like you may not. In any case, even if cost were no object (and it always is to one extent or another), my recommendation is for a Nikkormat w/ an H 50 2 non AI lens to get you started. Very dependable, good build quality, and they are fun to shoot and take excellent photos. It's the camera I most miss from all the cameras I've owned. A little unconventional on the shutter speed adjustment, you have to get used to it being in a different place, but after a while it seems like they all should be this way. Great value for the price too.
Quite frankly, coming from large format, you will never be happy with 35mm. Even a 5000$ Leica kit you won't be happy.
You will be happy with your Fuji. Even though it's big, it is relatively light weight.
A yashica or Rollei twin lens reflex will also fit the bill. But only if you like that style.
Another option is a 645 camera. The little Fuji af camera makes a great travel camera. Or one of the slr's.
You are serious about your photos, so I'm not going to suggest a medium format folder or a point and shoot 35mm. While they are fun, they are inconsistent.
Thank you very much to all of you for the informative replies. I have noted the suggestions if I decide to go with 35mm. I say "if" because of concerns about print quality from downsizing. Coming from a lifetime of large and medium format films, it may be best for me to stay with the bulkier Fuji 6x7. I need to give more thought to the concept of downsizing.
Bill Barber, I am most appreciative of your kind offer. Thank you.
Best regards,
Merg
It doesn't get much more compact in the SLR world than the Pentax LX or MX, with a 40mm f/2.8 pancake lens. That's an awesome combination for travel photography that is light and weighs very little. The 40mm lens should be stopped down to f/5.6 or smaller to give its best. The 35mm f/2 lens is also superb, but if you really want a normal the 55mm f/1.8 is amazing (and far less costly than the other two I mentioned).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?