medium format, large format: is 'more' necessarily more...?
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 12:13 pm
hello--
Please take moment to define different qualities of prints for both medium and large format photography. Said another way: is it true that for b & w prints the larger format will capture more light-bearing image--and, is preferred for that reason (owing solely to larger surface area of negative) than a medium format negative--or, does the MF negative have features particular to that format size (e.g., thinner emulsion) that LF does not?
I am venturing into LF--keh has a couple of basic 4 x5 cameras for around $200: an omega
4X5 OMEGA VIEW 45C LARGE FORMAT VIEW CAMERA BODY http://is.gd/liCTaQ
and a calumet
4X5 CALUMET 540 CHROME LARGE FORMAT VIEW CAMERA BODY http://is.gd/6yc7N6
Which appears to be the better value?
Thank you
Dean Taylor
Please take moment to define different qualities of prints for both medium and large format photography. Said another way: is it true that for b & w prints the larger format will capture more light-bearing image--and, is preferred for that reason (owing solely to larger surface area of negative) than a medium format negative--or, does the MF negative have features particular to that format size (e.g., thinner emulsion) that LF does not?
I am venturing into LF--keh has a couple of basic 4 x5 cameras for around $200: an omega
4X5 OMEGA VIEW 45C LARGE FORMAT VIEW CAMERA BODY http://is.gd/liCTaQ
and a calumet
4X5 CALUMET 540 CHROME LARGE FORMAT VIEW CAMERA BODY http://is.gd/6yc7N6
Which appears to be the better value?
Thank you
Dean Taylor