Kirk, I like your way of thinking, but maybe it is the thoughts of all those lovely ladies of the past that you are missing rather than the way a larger format displayed them.
Those images right there, thats why you want this camera. I get it completely. The look is all there. Fantastic.
I have fond memories of a 500CM, 150mm lens, Chimera bank with a 2000w Dyna-Lite, Agfa APX100 in Rodinal and a print on Agfa Portriga Rapid. Loved that. Why did I stop.
I think the Fujifilm 50S/R model would do it too but that IBIS in the new 100 could only be handy for anything handheld.
So maybe the 90mm 2.0 on the XH-1 cropped to square (that would tighten the "135mm" view) would also get you closer to the look? With careful USM some masking (very easy in LR and Alienskin X4) you could get some snap and smooth in the image. Just a thought.
I think also that maybe back when you shot the images here you were evaluating prints and not just a screen version. No print can look like a a screen as its reflective vs backlit images. I'd love to see a print comparison and I wouldn't care if it was inkjet vs silver. Just to see prints from a Hasselblad vs a 50 or 100 meg Fuji would be a great excersize. I've seen very few of my own images printed over the last 7 years.
Echoing the first comment, I wonder if you're thinking of the camera and lens or of the young woman in front of it. Or of a nostalgia for those days.
More technically, when I "do the math" I see a sensor half the size of 645, or with only 1.6 times the area of full frame. I wonder if that is large enough to recreate the medium format look you seek.
I will be most interested to see how it works for you, and how the Fuji performs in the market. From a marketing view I can see how this could be a very good move for Fuji -- to simply skip over full frame. As a practical matter for working photographers I wonder how it will play out.
Recently I’ve been looking at photos taken by my sister, using an old Yashica TLR and an app based light meter. There is definitely something about the look to them. I’m looking forward to playing with this old camera.
Kirk, you are 63 years old, your business is flourishing, your son has finished college, and I believe you have said that your retirement is vested. If you have the money to spend, disregard the well-meaning naysayers and get the camera you want if you think it will help you get the results you want in that area of photography that is obviously most meaningful to you.
I do think though, that you would be happier with a lens longer than 110mm, which is a bit of a quandary, as the 120 is not much longer, while the s 250 is probably too long. The 100-200mm zoom might work, but I'm not sure you would be happy with a maximum aperture of f5.6.
On the other hand, though, I am sure you have already thought through all of the above.
The Hasselblad double marks on the edge. Years back a show of square prints showing the film edges - the photographer was good and told everyone he used a Hasselblad. One photographer told him NOPE - I can see you don't use one. He insisted - and the other photographer asked "where are the edge marks"?
Move forward about a year and another show was up, big square prints - new images and they showed the double Vee's. Again, "shot with a Hasselblad". Trouble was - the repair shop that he hired to vile the Vees into the Mamiya 2 1/4 square camera he actually used had an employee in attendance - can called him out on it and he had to admit the truth. He moved out of the area right after that so I don't know if he kept it up or actually bought a Hasselblad.
I know what you mean. I've had an old Rolleiflex E2 I've used since the mid-1980s. I bought it from the guy who used it to shoot our wedding in 1978. I still run at least a half-dozen rolls of 400TX through it each year. I bought a Hasselblad 500CM in the late 90s then sold it a few years later because I just did not use it enough. I sold it to a young woman photog whose work I admired. She's still using it. Back in college I had a Mamiya RB67. I carried that brick in my backpack every day. I sold it to buy 35mm gear when I started working for a newspaper. So, a few weeks ago, I bought another RB from the estate of a good friend, along with a 50mm, 90mm, and 180mm, plus an extra back. I just finished developing 3 rolls from this morning's Memorial Day parade. Glad to see that I retained the muscle memory and had no problems working with it. No darkroom, but a changing bag, the laundry room sink, and an Epson V750 scanner work pretty well. Although 100 percent of my paid work is digital, I still have a thing for B&W film. I probably always will.
10 comments:
Kirk, I like your way of thinking, but maybe it is the thoughts of all those lovely ladies of the past that you are missing rather than the way a larger format displayed them.
Those images right there, thats why you want this camera. I get it completely. The look is all there. Fantastic.
I have fond memories of a 500CM, 150mm lens, Chimera bank with a 2000w Dyna-Lite, Agfa APX100 in Rodinal and a print on Agfa Portriga Rapid. Loved that. Why did I stop.
I think the Fujifilm 50S/R model would do it too but that IBIS in the new 100 could only be handy for anything handheld.
So maybe the 90mm 2.0 on the XH-1 cropped to square (that would tighten the "135mm" view) would also get you closer to the look? With careful USM some masking (very easy in LR and Alienskin X4) you could get some snap and smooth in the image. Just a thought.
Those photos don't reflect on the camera,
they reflect on the great relation, or rapport, to the photographer.
( The used sensor/film size?
I (a long time amateur) would need some training to appreciate - or even see - a difference in looks.)
I think also that maybe back when you shot the images here you were evaluating prints and not just a screen version. No print can look like a a screen as its reflective vs backlit images. I'd love to see a print comparison and I wouldn't care if it was inkjet vs silver. Just to see prints from a Hasselblad vs a 50 or 100 meg Fuji would be a great excersize.
I've seen very few of my own images printed over the last 7 years.
Echoing the first comment, I wonder if you're thinking of the camera and lens or of the young woman in front of it. Or of a nostalgia for those days.
More technically, when I "do the math" I see a sensor half the size of 645, or with only 1.6 times the area of full frame. I wonder if that is large enough to recreate the medium format look you seek.
I will be most interested to see how it works for you, and how the Fuji performs in the market. From a marketing view I can see how this could be a very good move for Fuji -- to simply skip over full frame. As a practical matter for working photographers I wonder how it will play out.
Awesome camera but how would you handle the computer workflow?
Recently I’ve been looking at photos taken by my sister, using an old Yashica TLR and an app based light meter. There is definitely something about the look to them. I’m looking forward to playing with this old camera.
Kirk, you are 63 years old, your business is flourishing, your son has finished college, and I believe you have said that your retirement is vested. If you have the money to spend, disregard the well-meaning naysayers and get the camera you want if you think it will help you get the results you want in that area of photography that is obviously most meaningful to you.
I do think though, that you would be happier with a lens longer than 110mm, which is a bit of a quandary, as the 120 is not much longer, while the s 250 is probably too long. The 100-200mm zoom might work, but I'm not sure you would be happy with a maximum aperture of f5.6.
On the other hand, though, I am sure you have already thought through all of the above.
Bottom line,just do it.
The Hasselblad double marks on the edge. Years back a show of square prints showing the film edges - the photographer was good and told everyone he used a Hasselblad.
One photographer told him NOPE - I can see you don't use one.
He insisted - and the other photographer asked "where are the edge marks"?
Move forward about a year and another show was up, big square prints - new images and they showed the double Vee's. Again, "shot with a Hasselblad". Trouble was - the repair shop that he hired to vile the Vees into the Mamiya 2 1/4 square camera he actually used had an employee in attendance - can called him out on it and he had to admit the truth. He moved out of the area right after that so I don't know if he kept it up or actually bought a Hasselblad.
I know what you mean. I've had an old Rolleiflex E2 I've used since the mid-1980s. I bought it from the guy who used it to shoot our wedding in 1978. I still run at least a half-dozen rolls of 400TX through it each year. I bought a Hasselblad 500CM in the late 90s then sold it a few years later because I just did not use it enough. I sold it to a young woman photog whose work I admired. She's still using it. Back in college I had a Mamiya RB67. I carried that brick in my backpack every day. I sold it to buy 35mm gear when I started working for a newspaper.
So, a few weeks ago, I bought another RB from the estate of a good friend, along with a 50mm, 90mm, and 180mm, plus an extra back. I just finished developing 3 rolls from this morning's Memorial Day parade. Glad to see that I retained the muscle memory and had no problems working with it.
No darkroom, but a changing bag, the laundry room sink, and an Epson V750 scanner work pretty well.
Although 100 percent of my paid work is digital, I still have a thing for B&W film. I probably always will.
Post a Comment