Because we see in landscape orientation. It's that simple. Hardly laziness. Was Monet lazy for painting in landscape orientation?
Fail to understand this recurring complaint about 645 cameras having "wrong" orientation. Why should landscape be "right" and portrait be "wrong"? After I started using my GS645W I realized the natural prevalence of landscape orientation was partly a result of laziness.
No but you can blame nearly all cameras(except one) for failing to produce that "glow and sunshine" in the negative or is it the print. I am never sure whichWell, you can't blame the camera for laziness.
That reminded me about a member of LFF that I researched (he was selling something and I was doing a spot check on the guy) and found out that he's legally blind and a fantastic photographer.I worked as a professional vocational rehabilitation counselor for the Blind and Visually Impaired, in the mid 90s I worked with a consumer who was losing his vision due to age related macular degeneration. He was a very busy commercial photogprher and was having issues focusing. Although he had an assistant who could fine focus for static shots he hated being dependent on others. He was shooting with a Hassy and a Canon EOS 1 later 1N. What he decided to do was remove the focusing hood and used a loup for find focus. I think he used a 5x loupe. When working outdoors he used a dark cloth.
Interesting that perhaps a majority of cell-phone camera pictures and videos are in portrait orientation, even when landscape would be preferable...Because we see in landscape orientation. It's that simple. Hardly laziness. Was Monet lazy for painting in landscape orientation?
Reginald - I almost gave up on TLR's, which has been my favorite for shooting 120 film - most are dim and the ocular made it difficult due to my aging eyes.
My solution:
Mamiya C (pick one, C220, C3, C330)
Mamiya C Chimney finder with rubber eye cup. It also has a flip up magnifier inside for critical focus if you need it.
And what I have done as over the years my eyes got worse, I just lay a close-up filter, (like you would screw onto the front of any 35mm camera lens) inside the top of the eye cup and it corrects for focusing.
I'm in a similar demographic...
It distresses me to write this in public, but I completely concur with the advise of SiriusGlass (post 14).
Yeah, the portrait mode of the GA645 is a bit off putting at first, but I would still explore this camera if you can. It has a lot of benefits, especially if you want something small and easy to travel with.
Just read a glowing review of how the Pentax 645n works, controls, usage and so on. That is moving way UP on my list! I love the dead simplicity and of course the AF/AE.
Just read a glowing review of how the Pentax 645n works, controls, usage and so on. That is moving way UP on my list! I love the dead simplicity and of course the AF/AE. Of course there is that Hassleblad lust to deal with yet.
One thing I especially liked about my Pentax 645NII was the exposure imprinting between frames.
The Pentax lenses including the 35mm wide were great and the camera handled better and was much lighter than the Bronica ETRSI.
I liked the Fujifilm GA645 but had a hard time nailing the focus and worried about the electronics going south.
I love the big negative. I love the idea of MF. But, I have tried and failed so many times to get a camera that will work for me. The main problem is not so great eyesight, and having much trouble finding a MF camera that is easy to focus. I have owned Ikontas, Rolleicord, Mamiya 6 and 645, Yashica Mat, Fuji GA690, and now a Bronica GS-1. Ok - yes, a bit of a camera whore, I know. I have taken some great pictures with the Super Ikonta, a few good ones with the Fuji rangefinder, but mostly, and consistently, no matter which camera I try, I fail to get sharp focus so often that I cry when the film comes back.
In the 35mm world, I had to move to strictly AF cameras. I have had great luck with Canon EOS-1v, and my current favorite the Minolta/Dynax alpha-9. My digital rig is a Fujifilm X-T2 and that works fine too. But dang it, I want to shoot MF!
My feeling was the TLRs were so dim in the finder I could barely see focus at all. The rangefinders were nice and light and the Fuji had an amazing viewfinder, but still no joy. The Mamiya 645 was just too damn heavy, as is my current Bronica.
The Super Ikonta was a romantic relic that was lovely, but just a bit too eccentric what with cocking shutters and all.
Ok, is there a question here?Yes. I can't afford the few AF MFs that are out there. Just not in my budget. So, is there an MF that makes focusing a DREAM for those with glasses and 70 year old eyes? You know, just from your personal experience. Also, not too darn bulky like this Bronica.
I know, I am asking too much, but it's worth a shot.
I would say they are perhaps the heaviest of the TLR's. Even with a good strap, when it's around your neck it can call for frequent breaks. I would say if one ceases to function, just use it as an anchor.My one word recollection is "brick." They ARE pretty heavy, aren't they?
Rather than a new camera maybe you need better eyes. Do you have cataracts ? Are eyes healthy?
Not knowing OP vision issues are, if OP vison is stable but not correctable to 20/20 or 20/30 then he/she may want to see a low vision specialist. Low vision specialist are either OD or MDs with additional residency in low vision. Some OTs are also trained in low vision. There are specialty glasses, frame mounted bioptics, loups, or even a hand held magnifier that could improve her/his near vision.
Well, one thing mine did was to help me configure a better bi-focal prescription. Didn’t change the viewing screen but helped me see it with less difficulty.Not sure what optometrists have to do with the fact that some focus screens are brighter, some are darker, some have focus aids, some don't, some are easier to focus on the matte part and some are trickier.
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?