Winsor;
OK. Can we agree that we've both got valid points? I agree that medium format
users have access to modern films, as do 35 mm and large format users. The
fact that most emulsions are available in all 3 formats assures that there is a
general progression in quality as you move up the ladder in emulsion size.
But the fact that some films are available only in one format or another makes
that format more useful in some ways. Your characterization of Kodachrome is
one I definitely do not share. Nor does Kodak. They most certainly DO have
versions of Kodachrome that are labelled professional. And rightly so.
K-chromes are still the most archival slide film by FAR. Something many pros
value. And many prefer their color rendition to that of the saturated 'Disney'
chromes, as some pros refer to Velvia and it's ilk. And KC-25 is STILL the
champ in resolution. In fact, a 35mm slide on KC-25 using a high quality lens
will approach or surpass a 100 or 400 speed 120 format chrome with an inferior
lens. And again I cite HIE, which is a unique film not available in 120
format. Many professionals use it. There is a Konica IR film in 120 size, but
it does not have HIEs' wide IR range or effects.
So what I'm saying is there are pro 35 films not available in 120. For this
reason, 35 mm has a larger range of creative possibilities. But equivalent 35 /
120 shots will always be better in 120 obviously.
Nuf said?
george
Winsor Crosby wrote:
> George,
> I think the original thread was based on the assertion that 35mm photo
> quality equalled medium format quality because of the improvement of films.
> What I was trying to point out as many others have pointed out is that
> medium format users are not using 1960 vintage films while 35 mm users have
> modern films. That was why I made the statement. The fact that a very few
> films are not available in 120 size is not going to prevent medium format
> users from buying modern high quality film showing the same improvements as
> 35mm. That is why your listing of the exceptions was beside the point. The
> reason I said, "professional film" is that almost all films labelled as
> professional by their manufacturers are available in 120. Kodak does not
> label a version of Kodachrome as "professional" and probably rightly so
> with its history of poor quality control and its 'legacy' color rendition.
> But that is probably another discussion.
>
> Sorry if I did not make myself clear.
>
> Winsor
>
> Winsor Crosby
> Long Beach, California
> mailto:wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|