Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Comments and opinions please, 6x7 or 6x9

  1. #1

    Comments and opinions please, 6x7 or 6x9

    As you may have guessed this is another beginers type question. I'm not looking for a one format vs another type of response here, just some constructive input . As some of you are aware, I just purchased an Arca-Swiss 6x9 F-Line Metric ca mera. I am still piecing together my first complete view camera outfit. I choo se the 6x9 format because I happen to be very comfortable with roll film, and ho nestly sheet film and thier associated holders still intimidate me "dust,dust,du st I hate dust". It will be several months before I complete all the purchases r equired to take my first photo with this camera outfit, so I have ample time to ask questions. I have never been a big fan of the 1:1.5 aspect ratio of 35mm fi lm, in the past I've prefered the standard 1:1.25 aspect ratio i.e. 8x10, 16x20, etc. or a square format over the 1:1.5 35mm format. But now I'm not so sure wh ich film back to purchase first with this new camera, the 6x7 or the 6x9. Lets face it, in the big scheme of things roll film is cheap compaired to sheet film. Should I get a 6x9 film back so that I have the largest film area available jus t in case I need it, and then plan on cropping most of my shots down to 6x7??? A re their fans out there of the 6x9 format coment please??? Some how I feel that I'll be cheated if I don't get a 6x9 back, but on the other hand I think the 6x 7 is the most practicle choice. Feedback Please, I think that I'm over thinking the whole matter. Thanks a lot. Bob Pellegrino

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Apr 2000

    Comments and opinions please, 6x7 or 6x9

    I think it's nice to have the size if you need it--I don't and I miss it.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 1999

    Comments and opinions please, 6x7 or 6x9

    I, too, have just become involved with 6x9 equipment, and have the same ambivilance about 6x7 or 6x9 roll film backs. I was surprised to discover that many 6x9 backs actually are closer to 6x8 (Graflex RH8=56mmx82mm), and decided this is the preferable size.

  4. #4

    Comments and opinions please, 6x7 or 6x9

    Frustrating if you have a 6x9 roll back, and a 6x6 enlarger though. I'm not bitter though. I'd rather have the 6x9 enlarger, but if I bought a new roll back, I'd now go 6x6 and get the extra shots of film. What's your enlarger? Dean
    Dean Lastoria

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2000

    Comments and opinions please, 6x7 or 6x9

    Robert, the best solution is to try them both (if you have a dealer that will help you out!!) and see what works best for the stuff you shoot. I personally just went through this dilemma, as I shoot architecture and annual report work on a arca swiss 4x5 F-line, and originally I started out shooting with 612 and 6x7 backs (as well as 4x5 on occasion) and I felt that 6x7 (for the sort of work I was doing) was just a little square for some architecture and structure shots, so I traded in on a 6x9 horseman back and am very impressed. But, as I said, it really depends on what you shoot and how you shoot it!! I actually found that 6x7 or 4x5 are my preferences for portraiture and product work, just because the shape is easier to compose for me for those types of things.....good luck on your quest!! ,

  6. #6

    Comments and opinions please, 6x7 or 6x9

    Buy the 6x7 for portrait; A portrait crop off a 6x9 can sometimes be impractical since many have the tendency to fill the frame. I'd shoot 6x9 for landscapes since a top, bottom, combination crop will give you a panoramic image. My perference is wider (6x9, 6x12) or square. The 6x7 for landscape just looks like it got chopped off and there's more picture that should have been there. Think... autumn forest shots, and crop where needed.

  7. #7

    Comments and opinions please, 6x7 or 6x9

    Though you say you don't like the 1:1.5 ratio of 35mm, take a look at your 35mm photographs. Do you tend to print full frame or crop?

    If you frequently or usually print full frame, perhaps you don't dislike it as much as you think.

    As for me, I like the ratio, because that is how I see. I wear glasses, and with the 2 eyes, I naturally get an elongated rectangular view. I find 4x5 a little too close to square. (But I also like the power of a truly square image.)

    No question for me, however. I would choose 6x9 because I can always crop. As you say, film is cheap.

    By the way, when I started with 4x5 I didn't have any ideas about how difficult it might be. So I just did it. The first time I loaded film the film jumped out of my hand and right into the holder. Well, it wasn't quite like that, but I didn't have any trouble at all loading the film. And dust has never been a particular problem. Some of these problems are vasly overstated. The point is, if you have a chance to work with 4x5, take it. It's pretty easy, and 4x5 sheet film is so much nicer to work with than roll film. Now 8x10 gets interesting!

    Good luck.

Similar Threads

  1. Comments on the Sinar P?
    By Indranath Neogy in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 6-Jul-2016, 07:37
  2. Set of Lenses for 8"x10" comments please!
    By Anselm Gademann in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 3-Feb-2004, 07:32
  3. Comments and opinions please, Pentax Flash Meter V
    By Robert J Pellegrino in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-Nov-2001, 18:15
  4. Azo comments
    By Ben Calwell in forum Darkroom: Film, Processing & Printing
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 25-Oct-2000, 21:42
  5. Comments on a Rajah 8 x 10
    By Jim Allen in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 3-Apr-2000, 18:33


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts