About Fuji GSW690 and GX680

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:27:10 -0500, Stacey wrote:

The weak point a

A really stupid "B" setting, they call it "T". When you trip the shutter, it
stays open until you either move the speed ring or recock the shutter so
you basically have to use a lens cap to close the shutter.

This is a pity.
I know how T mode works, I had it on my really-really-old Kodak
folding. This means a tripod is mandatory for long exposures, while B
would have been useable with just a proper support like a flat rock.

I ended up selling mine mainly because I got bored with the angle of view. I
think the 90mm version might be more useful?

Well, I think it depends from what one shoots... I use the equivalent
of 24mm and wider very very much, while I don't happen to like
"normal" FOVs a lot.
To be honest, I'd LOVE a Mamiya 7 with that incredible 43mm lens, but
it's still so expensive! Plus I don't like the 6x7 format that
much (almost square but not really square), a matter of personal taste
of course.

Many thanks. :-)

Fernando

LR Kalajainen wrote in message ...
I haven't found the micro or local contrast of the lens to be a
problem. It might be a function of film/developer/development time
combination rather than the lens. It is a constrasty lens, and if it
has a fault, it's that it doesn't have as pleasing "bokeh" (visual
quality of the out-of-focus elements of the picture) as, say, Zeiss or
Leica lenses do, but it's comparable to other Japanese lenses.


Lens affects the micro contrast tremendously. I have found that it´s
impossible to duplicate the look of a particualr lens using another
one by simply changing film/developer/development time. Zeiss are the
best in that regard.

The has an ugly bokeh but wide angle lenses don´t have it, even Zeiss.

J.

I'm not saying that lenses have no effect on micro contrast, just that=20
my experience with this particular Fuji lens doesn't appear to have that =

effect on my prints. And since most of my shots are stopped down to at=20
least f8 or f11, bokeh doesn't enter into the picture that much for me=20
either.=20

Jytzel wrote:

LR Kalajainen wrote in message news:WPe=
...
=20

I haven't found the micro or local contrast of the lens to be a=20
problem. It might be a function of film/developer/development time=20
combination rather than the lens. It is a constrasty lens, and if it=20
has a fault, it's that it doesn't have as pleasing "bokeh" (visual=20
quality of the out-of-focus elements of the picture) as, say, Zeiss or =

Leica lenses do, but it's comparable to other Japanese lenses.
=20



Lens affects the micro contrast tremendously. I have found that it=B4s
impossible to duplicate the look of a particualr lens using another
one by simply changing film/developer/development time. Zeiss are the
best in that regard.

The has an ugly bokeh but wide angle lenses don=B4t have it, even Zeiss.=


J.=20


=20