I also found the square format to have two advantages:
1. It could make composing EASIER in that you didn't have to rotate the
camera (or back) to get the "right" orientation. Cropping the final
print to a non-square format was all you needed to do, and visualizing
the scene as such was not a problem for me. A ground glass with 645
format formatting scribed or such could be used if desied.
2. When the subject/scene called for a square format, you could compose
to the to the edge of the frame -- much easier than cropping out
valuable negative real estate from a 645 format neg/slide.
I had Rollei SL66 bodies and backs. Not as reliable as Hasselblad, but
the built-in bellows, perspective control and reversability of Rollei
lenses for macro work was wonderful.
Earl
BllPear@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>John,
>
>The M7 is an entirely different camera for entirely different uses. I
>certainly wouldn't want to shoot portraits or product photos with one, but for
>landscapes and street shooting, it's perfect.
>
>The interchangable backs on the 'blad are proven and trouble free. It is
>actually (at least the 500 series) a very basic camera. Right now, the resale
>on the Mamiya are probably holding up better.
>
>The advantage of the square format is for people that shoot for publication,
>catalogs, etc, where the 8x10 proportion is not desired.
>
>Bill Pearce
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|