From: terry roth (terryroth@earthlink.net)
Date: 03/25/01-10:05:56 AM Z
I agree with you about the GSWIII---I used one in Italy in 1997, and the
chromes and FP4 are the sharpest and most beautful I have shot in 40 years.
I sold my H'blad after using the Fuji---no contest. In credible lens,.
sadly, the FUJI GW670 90mm is ordinary in comparison. 16x20 prints from
Provia slide film from the GSW690 do no suffer in comparison with 4x5. (No,
they are not equal, but the difference is slight.)
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandy King <sanking@hubcap.clemson.edu>
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 7:10 AM
Subject: Re: Direct negatives from slides
> Rocky from Houston wrote:
>
> >Being a sharpness freak I have now moved into an 8X10 camera. Now all I
need
> >is more time to shoot.
>
> Having used 7x17 and 12X20 cameras for some years, and having just made a
> significant investment in a new 12X20 camera, I consider myself something
> of a sharpness freak as well. I love working with ultra-large format
> cameras as they have a special and quite unique appeal. And in many
> situations it is just about as easy to make a negative with this type of
> camera as with one of smaller format.
>
> However, when sharpness is the only issue (and Carl Weese may take issue
> with me on this) I see little difference prints made from my 6x9 negatives
> exposed with a Fuji GSWIII 6x9 camera and enlarged to 12X18, with contact
> prints made directly form 12X20 negatives. Note, I said *little*
> difference, as opposed to no difference. No doubt this is due in part to
> the outstanding quality of negatives made with the Fuji GSWIII 6X9 camera,
> which because of the large negative size and outstanding nature of the EBC
> Fujinon SW lens really have no equal in the medium format area, not even
> from the Hasselblad.
>
> Sandy King
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/02/01-09:55:26 AM Z CST