Just to clear something up, I DID NOT say that the 8x10's I got from a
Zuiko 35mm were as good as the 8x10's that I got from a Fuji medium format
camera. Rather, I said that folks had trouble telling them apart when they
weren't side-by-side and most importantly when they were 4-6 ft. away. Up
close there is more detail in wood grains, hair definition, shadow details,
lichens growing on rocks, etc. but all those things are fairly subtle and
require close inspection. As far as grain goes, I believe grain size using
modern films and developing techniques can be minimized on sizes up to 8x10
to such an extent that it really doens't play the image wrecking role that
it once did. It's true that it's visible in the 35mm prints 8x10's in
sections of open sky, but that's only noticeable close up. Most folks never
see it when looking at a picture on the wall assuming that it was printed
well, and from modern emulsions. Anyway, I obviously think that there's
enough difference in the potential of the larger formats to have kept the
Fuji 645.
Thanks to those who emailed me.
Mike Swaim
< 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 >
|