A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » Medium Format Photography Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

portable (smallest) 120mm camera?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 29th 04, 05:28 AM
Mike Henley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default portable (smallest) 120mm camera?

I like small cameras and just got a mju-ii and minox gt-s. Some guys
over at 35mm newsgroup suggested i get an SLR (35mm) if i want to get
serious about photography. I don't feel very enthausiastic about 35mm
SLR because i don't see that they add much to my preferences other
than the size, meaning i'd have to wear the camera around my neck or
in a bag rather than i do currently carrying the minox/mjuii in a
small belt pouch (i don't like zoom, i don't like flash, i don't like
buying lenses, i just simply like available light photography, nature
and some landscape). Now, i just realized that i can get 120mm film
for about the same price as 35mm film (from a web supplier), and to be
honest if i'm going to carry a camera that doesn't fit in my pocket or
a bet pouch, i may be more tempted to get a smallest possible 120mm
than a 35mm SLR ('cos after all, i'd carry either in a little rucksack
and the 120mm would give me something different from the minox and
mjuii).

Now, 35mm film has advanced considerably lately, and my preferred film
is the fuji superia xtra 400 (good enough and i can get it cheaply);
What would a medium format offer me that 35mm doesn't? is enlargement
potential the only advantage? Also, if so, i can use iso50 35mm film
on the mjuii and iso25 35mm on the minox gt-s, would these rival
iso100 or iso400 120mm film (those are the ones cheaply/widely
available)? the lens on both is f2.8 and so far i feel i can use a
slow film (low iso) while still getting adequate exposure.

So, i know you guys would probably not welcome my apparent comparison
of 35mm compact (p&s) to 120mm but i'm just respectfully asking
whether the format offer significant advantages over the *finest* 35mm
film, and i think this is a reasonable question to ask.

Also, if so, what's the smallest and lightest 120mm camera? I don't
really care much for features as my style is mostly point & shoot and
i think more about composition than technique or technology. Regarding
automation, i don't care much about shutter speed (i don't really
photograph action/sport) but i would like to have control over
focusing and aperture, though not necessarily.

regards
  #2  
Old May 29th 04, 06:03 AM
Stacey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default portable (smallest) 120mm camera?

Mike Henley wrote:


What would a medium format offer me that 35mm doesn't? is enlargement
potential the only advantage?


Less grain using faster film. I get nice results with asa 800 speed film in
8X10 prints.


So, i know you guys would probably not welcome my apparent comparison
of 35mm compact (p&s) to 120mm but i'm just respectfully asking
whether the format offer significant advantages over the *finest* 35mm
film, and i think this is a reasonable question to ask.


The size of the camera doesn't matter. I've taken some shots with a $80 P&S
olympus stylus 35mm f2.8 that no one could tell from an expencive SLR. Even
some of my old folding 35mm's with tessar/color skopar lenses produce fine
results.



Also, if so, what's the smallest and lightest 120mm camera? I don't
really care much for features as my style is mostly point & shoot and
i think more about composition than technique or technology.


This is probably one of the best of the compact folding rangefinders. These
aren't real light or cheap though. Most are $350+

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...7671 581&rd=1

These can work good too and have the advantage of not haveing a front cell
focusing lens. The only issue is the frame counter is weak, get one that
has already been converted to red window counter operation. Most are under
$80-$100.

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/iskra.html

This is the smallest/lightest one I've found that produces quality images. I
have one of these in 6X4.5 with the folding viewfinder and a zeiss tessar
and it's great. It's as small as a 35mm P&S yet uses 120 film! Most are
around $100 with a tessar lens.

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/ikontaa.html



--

Stacey
  #3  
Old May 29th 04, 09:53 AM
Q.G. de Bakker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default portable (smallest) 120mm camera?

Stacey wrote:

What would a medium format offer me that 35mm doesn't? is enlargement
potential the only advantage?


Less grain using faster film. I get nice results with asa 800 speed film

in
8X10 prints.


More image details. Better tonality too. Not just less obvious grain.
You know that, Stacey!

So, i know you guys would probably not welcome my apparent comparison
of 35mm compact (p&s) to 120mm but i'm just respectfully asking
whether the format offer significant advantages over the *finest* 35mm
film, and i think this is a reasonable question to ask.


The size of the camera doesn't matter. I've taken some shots with a $80

P&S
olympus stylus 35mm f2.8 that no one could tell from an expencive SLR.

Even
some of my old folding 35mm's with tessar/color skopar lenses produce fine
results.


This particular question is about the size of the film, not the size of the
camera, isn't it? ;-)

And, yes, even poor MF cameras produce better results than even the finest
35 mm film can produce.



  #4  
Old May 29th 04, 12:50 PM
Nick Zentena
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default portable (smallest) 120mm camera?

Mike Henley wrote:


So, i know you guys would probably not welcome my apparent comparison
of 35mm compact (p&s) to 120mm but i'm just respectfully asking
whether the format offer significant advantages over the *finest* 35mm
film, and i think this is a reasonable question to ask.


Yes. No reason you can't put the same film into the 120 camera. If you
want a simple example of what a big negative can do for you get a cheap 120
folder. Nothing fancy. Stick some film in it and try it out. Then compare
the prints to a good high $$$ 35mm cameras output. Size matters.


Also, if so, what's the smallest and lightest 120mm camera? I don't
really care much for features as my style is mostly point & shoot and
i think more about composition than technique or technology. Regarding
automation, i don't care much about shutter speed (i don't really
photograph action/sport) but i would like to have control over
focusing and aperture, though not necessarily.



Folders. Designed to slip inside a coat pocket. You'll need a handheld
meter. Less then $100 can get you a good example.

Nick
  #5  
Old May 29th 04, 03:27 PM
Bill Hilton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default portable (smallest) 120mm camera?

From: (Mike Henley)

Now, i just realized that i can get 120mm film
for about the same price as 35mm film (from a web supplier)


What exactly is "120mm film"?




  #9  
Old May 29th 04, 05:20 PM
Bill Hilton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default portable (smallest) 120mm camera?

From: (jjs)

Drifting OT, but consider this amusing
quote" "The megapixel myth is also prevalent because men always want a
single number by which something's goodness can be judged." -- Ken
Rockwell (See
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm)

Lurching either further OT, if this is the same guy I tuned him out when he
said jpeg was a better format than RAW ... OK, not much to learn from that site

  #10  
Old May 29th 04, 06:29 PM
Craig Schroeder
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default portable (smallest) 120mm camera?

Consider making a committment to the format and buying something like
the folding Fuji 645. Superb optics, accurate meter and easily slips
into a coat pocket. They've been slipping through the auction site at
affordable prices recently. I predict that once you've experienced
the results from the larger negative and high grade glass, you'll find
it hard to settle for less!


On 28 May 2004 21:28:58 -0700, (Mike Henley) wrote:


Also, if so, what's the smallest and lightest 120mm camera? I don't
really care much for features as my style is mostly point & shoot and
i think more about composition than technique or technology. Regarding
automation, i don't care much about shutter speed (i don't really
photograph action/sport) but i would like to have control over
focusing and aperture, though not necessarily.

regards


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's your digital camera history? David Dyer-Bennet Digital Photography 67 July 3rd 04 10:56 AM
Starting camera Scott M. Knowles Large Format Photography Equipment 17 July 2nd 04 01:35 PM
Sony Cybershot DSC-W1... Bad Camera...Bad Customer Service by Sony... Read on... unavailable 35mm Photo Equipment 38 June 29th 04 06:45 AM
For Sell --- SLR camera and a Point & Shoot APS Camera: Toronto slrcamera Medium Format Photography Equipment 4 April 1st 04 09:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.