If one has the patience and a good tripod, a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Crown Graphic
fitted out with a Scheidner 65 mm Angulon and 6x9 roll film back make an
excellent landscape or scenic camera. It's light weight (compared to my
Super Graphic 4x5), has limited movements (ok for scenics), provides
ground glass or rangefinder focus, and you just look so cool under the
dark cloth. Plus, 120 comes in a variety of emulsions and can be
processed many places. IF I still had a darkroom it would be the 4x5, but
since I'm doing "take out" 120 is better.
The press cameras won't ever replace the OMs in my cabinet, but they
certainly have their place.
Wayne
Winsor Crosby wrote:
> >My personal forays into medium format have been with the
> >following:
> >
> >Crown Graphic: Awesome pictures, tremendous flexibility, strong
> >as an ox and very usable. With the passages of time, this
> >camera could make a comeback as the ultimate "cool camera" to
> >own and use. Truely a functional retro camera. I love
> >composing on the 4x5. Unfortunately, totally lacking in any
> >electronics which aid the process. The well-practiced news pros
> >could out sequential shots in about five seconds. Might get a
> >nice lightweight field camera someday. 4x5 rules in the
> >darkroom too.
> >
> >Mamiya C220: Had three different lenses sets for it. Took
> >great pictures and I really like the square format. Aweful
> >ergonomics ruined it for me. No DOF preview was a major
> >drawback. The reversed image was something I could never come
> >to terms with as I compose with "flow" in mind. My pictures
> >were always static as a result.
> >
> >Mamiya 645: That was a nice camera. Lens wasn't the sharpest
> >and the viewfinder image was too dark. However, the ergonomics
> >were slightly better. The weight and size of the camera really
> >wasn't a problem and I hiked with it many miles. Sold it to
> >fund flying lessons or something crazy like that. Very easy to
> >compose images that more closely matched the 8x10 printing
> >format. The 100% viewfinder was a really nice touch and I've
> >missed that in the OMs.
> >
> >Mamiya Super-23: Bought it because I needed medium format for
> >wedding work. Good ergonomics, but the weight and size were
> >enough to wear out all but the strongest Patriots football
> >players. Sold it because I manage to survive weddings without
> >medium format. I'm reminded that I can't stand rangefinder
> >cameras. (XA being an exception). The camera also scared
> >children.
> >
> >My heart probably is still with the Mamiya 645.
> >
> >AG-Schnozz
> >
>
> I know you said autofocus, but then you would have to give up your
> retrogrouch label. I looked at the Mamiya 645E not too long ago.
> Very sweet and inexpensive basic camera with access to all of the 645
> professional lenses.
> --
> Winsor Crosby
> Long Beach, California
>
> < 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 >
< 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 >
|