"100 lppm, that's really something!"
From f/4 to f/8 it is more like 120lpmm. As for the sharpness issue, you will be able to see every wrinkle or blemish on the persons face. I don't know how effective the softening methods you mentioned would be.
"100 lppm, that's really something!"
From f/4 to f/8 it is more like 120lpmm. As for the sharpness issue, you will be able to see every wrinkle or blemish on the persons face. I don't know how effective the softening methods you mentioned would be.
I am in the same opinion as above. I consider the Mamiya 6&7 a very good support or assistance to LF. Rangefinders in my opinion are not the choice for portraits; however they save me in a lot of situations. I have two M6 bodies, one of them always fitted with a 150 for this kind of work . For closer portraits I usually take a Nikon with a 135 or 180. I shoot mostly outdoors.
Reportage handling?
SLR is still the best for the close-up portrait. The Mamiya lenses may be "tack sharp", but that means nothing if you can't use them to meet your needs. The Nikkor 135 and 180 lenses are tack sharp and can be used to meet your needs. If you want the larger negative, the Pentax 67 SLR may be an option. Even prices on used Hasselblads are looking good.
I noticed not much in the way of digital mentioned above. That's a shame as they do have a purpose and could help you solve your problem.
"I meant what I said, not what you heard"--Jflavell
Edward, I did mean Tony, sorry! Tony, The Fuji 690 is not gonna get you there for head and shoulders portraiture either. The 670 might but still don't think so. Closest focusing with the GW690 is 1 m. Now, the old Fuji with interchangable lenses would do nicely if you can find one in good working order. The 690II's and III's are tanks but the interrchangeable lens guys are a bit finicky. Another thought what about the old Mamiya Press 23 and in all its various incarnations?
I didn't find a rangefinder that great for portraits.
I just use a blad.
Not the answer you were looking for I'm sure.
-Rob
"Portraits" covers a lot of ground and most any camera qualifies in the largest sense of the word. A Mamiya 7 is great for "environmental portraits" or "two people mid-chest up" or "a small group portrait" but a Hassleblad can do that AND great "head and shoulders portraits" as well -- or an RZ, RB, various 645s etc. Any of those cameras and a couple of lenses and you're all set.
That said I think the Mamiya 7 is a great all-around camera but if you want close up abilty its not a good answer. As far as the Mamiya 7's sharpness goes you can always use gentler film like Ilford Delta 3200, a Softar filter or diffusion in printing. Its easy to soften an image and impossible to sharpen something thats soft on the neg. And with a 6X7 negative you can crop a bit and still have a decent film area to print from while getting tighter on the head and shoulders.
So for "head and shoulders portraits" ONLY buy an SLR. For more general use the Mamiya 7 is a great camera, light and handy to carry.
Late model (IV or Va or Vb) Rolleicord is cheap, sharp, and focusses too close. Available on a famous auction site for $100 and up.
After hundreds of rolls through Rollei TLRs, Fuji 6x9s, Hasselblad 500s, and even a full Mamiya 6 outfit, I came to the conclusion that medium format is always a compromise. Other than the Rollei 2.8 TLR, most have slow lenses or mirror slap that make handholding questionable. And if you're going to use a tripod anyway, why not pull out a field camera?
Once I found a Leica/Summilux and/or a Nikon DSLR at ASA 1600 with a 1.4 lens - now those are handholdable. The this winter I was taking full moon night shots handheld!
For kids, I would probably use the RB67. I've had a Pro-S for a little over a year and I really like it.
But... I shot two sets of portraits of the same subject. One set was with the RB the other with my Toyo-G. Out of 20 frames with the RB and a 180, I had two that I really liked. Out of 8 with the Toyo, I had two as well. The subject is an an actor, responds well to direction, and I've been friends with him for 27 years. So on personal aesthetic grounds, I think that its a wash.
On the other hand, the closeups that I was able to get with the Toyo and a 210 Schneider resolved to the pinpoints of his Oxford shirt, the fibres of his wool vest and the pores of his face. I wanted the detail, the five o'clock shadow, the worry lines of his forehead. The large negative helped to give it to me. These weren't glamour shots nor head shots for directors. I wanted to capture him in a way that stripped the illusion and replaced it with reality.
So in the end, I think it depends on what you want. Maybe the 7 will work, maybe you should get and RB, maybe you could find a C220 or C330 that you liked, but maybe the best camera is the one that you already have.
Frank:
You seem to have some knowledge of digital.
Whilst the part of my first question about hand-hold-ability was largely overlooked (pretty much discounting the RB) the bit about "Digital Toy" was in all honesty a serious consideration.
I found that with most of the portrait stuff I have done in past most people are happy with a print of about 16" X 20".
Do you feel this is a realistic goal for, say, an 8mp snapper or do I need to re-mortgage my house and get 16mp or even 22mp?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks