Even in the original masked cameras it still meant less apparitions and vignette at the corners. Which again let you shoot more open without so much “character”.
BTW, 6x4.5 "half frame" came about originally in folders -- with the inclusion of a simple drop-in or snap-in mask, the same camera could shoot full frame (contact prints big enough not to need reading glasses or magnification) or half frame (economy of more frames for the same film cost, hardly more processing). Dedicated cameras came later -- and all this professional stuff came after the folders.
I'm with you Don. I discovered that regardless of the camera aspect ratio, I compose automatically to fit the format I see in the camera.I don't find any format boring. I shoot 2:3 (35 mm, 6x9), 3:4 (6x4.5, 9x12, 18x24mm), 4:5 (4x5 and 6x7), and 1:1. I've got a pano/sprocket setup for my RB67 that shoots 35x67 (sprockets included) or 24x67 (if I make a mask or crop off the sprockets).
I like all of them. I compose differently for each.
BTW, 6x4.5 "half frame" came about originally in folders -- with the inclusion of a simple drop-in or snap-in mask, the same camera could shoot full frame (contact prints big enough not to need reading glasses or magnification) or half frame (economy of more frames for the same film cost, hardly more processing). Dedicated cameras came later -- and all this professional stuff came after the folders.
Over in this quantum reality, I'm pretty sure that 1080p is 1920x1080 (16:9) and 4k is 3840x2160 (16:9).
Outside of 6x12 format negatives, I can't think of a single example of 2:1 aspect ratio.
Almost all Hasselblad film images are/were originally square, but the vast majority of those shots were made by professional photographers whose prints ended up rectangular. The entire professional lab industry was oriented that way.
The RB67 is Rotating Back, but less fieldable
Ended up ordering a Mamiya 645E with 80mm 2.8 N lens, winder grip, 120 insert, for about $500 shipped from KEH. I heard they're a reputable dealer so hopefully it will be OK. Lens was "bargain" quality but I've heard they grade conservatively so I think it should be OK. Let me know if you have any comments on this camera. I'm glad it has all the parts together, I was having trouble finding a camera with all the modular parts assembled and 120 back, working meter, etc.
Who on earth suggested getting a Mamiya 645?!?! Oh, wait...that was me(and others). I really hope you enjoy it. I very much liked the images I got when I had that 80/2.8 normal lens, both times I owned a Mamiya 645 system. I think it was a good choice for you to buy the whole system at once and be able to just shoot right out of the gate. Personally, I've had good luck with KEH.
Now, the hard part: don't second guess your decision. Just shoot. No gear lust/"but what if"/grass is greener. Just shoot the living heck out of your camera. After a while, figure out if you need a lens that's a bit wider, or a lot longer. Get that. Just shoot. Then shoot some more. For the foreseeable future, Bronicas and RBs and f/2.8 TLRs don't exist in your world; they're all broken and full of fungus.
I'm not suggesting to not try something new ever again, just to not do it until you know "why" you might need something different. That knowing, I think, doesn't come until you have a really good understanding of the strengths and weakness of what you already have, and that takes time (and film).
Who on earth suggested getting a Mamiya 645?!?! Oh, wait...that was me(and others). I really hope you enjoy it. I very much liked the images I got when I had that 80/2.8 normal lens, both times I owned a Mamiya 645 system. I think it was a good choice for you to buy the whole system at once and be able to just shoot right out of the gate. Personally, I've had good luck with KEH.
Now, the hard part: don't second guess your decision. Just shoot. No gear lust/"but what if"/grass is greener. Just shoot the living heck out of your camera. After a while, figure out if you need a lens that's a bit wider, or a lot longer. Get that. Just shoot. Then shoot some more. For the foreseeable future, Bronicas and RBs and f/2.8 TLRs don't exist in your world; they're all broken and full of fungus.
I'm not suggesting to not try something new ever again, just to not do it until you know "why" you might need something different. That knowing, I think, doesn't come until you have a really good understanding of the strengths and weakness of what you already have, and that takes time (and film).
Yeah I see some people buy the modular system in parts, but I'd be worried if you get a certain part that doesn't work, it'd be hard to diagnose and return it if you get from different sources. But probably the parts are OK if they are advertised as working, but I was worried about it since they all have electrical contacts and are getting a little bit old. Especially the leaf shutter in the Bronica which is in the lens, and is controlled by the electrical contacts in the body, I'd be worried about that and hard to CLA it.
Anyway I look forward to getting my Mamiya soon and shooting with it, hopefully it's in good condition as advertised.
If square is better then why aren't there any digital cameras with square sensors? I just think square is something that stuck when the box cameras came a long. I personally don't like the square format even though every medium format camera I have other than a Medalist is square format. There may be a reason that falls into the category of there are things I don't know, I don't know.
You can't turn a waist level finder camera on it's side and still see through the finder.If square is better then why aren't there any digital cameras with square sensors? I just think square is something that stuck when the box cameras came a long. I personally don't like the square format even though every medium format camera I have other than a Medalist is square format. There may be a reason that falls into the category of there are things I don't know, I don't know.
Sure you can - if you don't mind the world being reversed and upside down!You can't turn a waist level finder camera on it's side and still see through the finder.
Sure you can - if you don't mind the world being reversed and upside down!
Just like any waist level finderAnd looking 90 degrees to the direction the camera is pointing in...
I’ve taken a few portrait shots with a WLF. It’s doable, but quite challenging.
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?