Inspiration: Radoslaw Pujan (Kinky Wednesday)

"Photographer. Born in Poznan (Poland). Then lived in Krakow, Brussels, Cannes.

Resides in Brussels. Main interest in creative Portrait, Beauty and Fashion photography."

Classic female portraits, you see a lot of this on Flickr but only few pull it really well. He uses medium and large format, which I really like too of course. Not much to say, enjoy.

His stream here.

Inspiration: "KUNI" (Mita Kunihiko?)

I know him as KUNI on Flickr, not sure what is full name is. All I know for sure is that he is from Japan.



He doesn't shoot hot half naked girls, or fancy concepts, or traumatized people with weird looks. He shoots his city, people around him, and cats...and it feels smooth, peaceful, light, refreshing, definitely zen.

He is one of the few who's portfolio I watch nearly entirely every time I check his posts on Flickr.

He is all about subtlety and I love that. Also he shoot a lot of Pentax 67 medium format and I love that too, as well as Nikon film SLR (the F100, great value for the money if you are looking for a film SLR).

I envy his abilities in developing film, his colors are always mind blowing, way way superior than any digital work I've seen. And he plays a lot with DOF, which you can do when shooting the right format, and I love it too :)

Here is a personal selection, go check him out here.

What could be the best camera in the world ?

As a frequent reader of Ken Rockwell's work, I couldn't help but notice how intense he gets about the cameras that he likes. I very much like a lot of what he tries to teach people, about what makes a good camera, the tricks of marketing to make us buy useless features and overal, the idea according to which anything can make a great pictures. Gear just makes it easier or more pleasant to do.

But strangely, as there is no such thing as a perfect camera for all purposes, Ken states the best camera in the world exist in the shape of the Mamiya 7...

Well how about that ! A single camera to rule them all? It like people asking "what's your favorite song ever?", I hate those questions. I hate them because "it depends". It always depends, on the mood and other things. I have a dozen favorite songs of all time ever, same applies to cameras ! just check my previous post, that pretty much summarizes it all...hum...Ken has a point though.

What if I had to go with only one camera, for the rest of my life, what could this one be?

• First it would be a medium format camera. 35mm...let's be serious there, and large format is too inconvenient. Also it wouldn't be a 645 format. This intermediate format is not the real thing, medium format shows great benefits from 6x6 up to 6X9.
• It would have built in metering (duh !), because...well off camera metering is way to annoying on the go.
• It would use interchangeable lenses. Including portrait and landscape focal lengths.
• It would be somehow portable. That excludes the Mamiya RZ and other tank-like cameras and greatly reduce the scope of possible cameras.
• It would be astonishing result wise.
• It would not cost more than 3 000$ with one or two lenses,  because it wouldn't be aiming at wannabe art hipsters willing to remain exclusive, with their Leica on the living room coffee table, although you can't seem to ever see a decent print of their "work".

What does that leave us with?

All Fujicas' are excluded: fix lenses, no metering. Too bulky for the GX680. Brilliant camera's though, but not eligible.

No 645, that limits the scope.

We are left with Hasselblad's, Mamiya 6, 7 and 67's, Rollei's TLR, Pentax 67II...

Hasselblad's  and the Mamiya 67's are bulky, metering requires a big add on on top of it. 

We are left with the Mamiya 6, Mamiya 7 and Pentax 67 II.

Now the Mamiya 6 and 7 are essentially different  by the format, the 6 is square 6x6 format, the 7 is a 6X7 format. I do believe it's nearly impossible to sort those two from one another. They have a couple of major advantages:
- they are super small
- they produce amazing images
- overal they match all the criteria, but...

- they don't really offer good portrait low light lenses.

On the other corner, the Pentax 67 II:
- image quality is as brilliant, it's a draw
- it has a range of lenses allowing portrait & landscape
- it is rock solid but...

- it's very, very heavy and noisy.

The best camera in the world is one of them. As a portrait photographer, I would tend to pick the Pentax 67II for the 90mm f2.8 lens.
For having carried the Mamiya RZ67 on my shoulders while traveling, i'd pick the Mamiya 6 for portability and the 2 extra frames per roll.

Those would be the 2 best cameras in the world for me. And yes I know I had to pick one...

Since I already have a RZ67 I would pick the Mamiya 6. If I didn't have the RZ, I'd start with the Pentax, but in the end, I would buy both. Anyway, my point is: if I had to own only one, it would be a Pentax 67II.

Your choice should be based on your taste for landscape (Mamiya 6) VS portraits (Pentax).

35mm, DX & FX, Medium and large formats...

Heya!

Blogging at night (and watching American Dad...) makes me tired at work, so I'm using a coffee break to write this one :)

Today we discover what those terms means, 35mm, 135, 220 and 220 film, full frame, FX or DX digital cameras, medium & large format, etc.

This is tremendously important since the differences between all these are huge, and each format matches more a less a certain type of photography. Understanding format can be the key to picking the right equipement for you.

Let's simplify things first: imagine there is no digital yet. We would have "small" format, always called 35mm, medium and large format films.

• 35mm camera use 35mm film also called 135 film. The frames are 24x36mm
• Medium format camera use film called 120. The frame are about 60mm high, and width goes from 45mm to 90mm. That explain names such as "Pentax 67", or "Bronica 645". Depending on the width, it will us more or less film and you'll be able to take more or less shots on a roll of 120 film (from 8 shots in 6X9 to 15 shot in 6x4.5)
• Large format is film or plates that are 4x5 inches and up. I won't develop large format since it remains very confidential and is not likely to capture your attention. Also I don't use it, and I'd rather not talk about something I don't know.

So we've seen that those formats correspond to different sizes of film. But what's with digital?

• The vast majority of digital DSLRs are called DX cameras. Top or the range DSLRs are called FX or full frame (Nikon D700, D3, Canon 5DmkII).
• A full frame FX has a digital sensor the size of 35mm film, 24x36mm.
• DX camera has a smaller sensor, usually 30% smaller. It has one main consequence : it does not use all the image that the lens gets on. You end up with only the 70% center part of the image. If your lens is a 50mm, it's like you're zooming on the middle of your image with a 75mm. It's called crop factor.

See that shot? A full frame camera (FX) would give you the green frame, a DX camera body (Nikon D80, D90, D300, D7000 and Canon 550D, 7D, 450D, 50D, etc.) would only see the red frame, even though the all thing is "seen" by the lens.

FYI, medium format digital cameras exists, Hasseblad, Phase One, Mamiya but they cost an arm (15k and up).

Does format changes anything when it comes to image quality?

- Heeeeelll yeaaahhhh !!!!

It changes everything. Let's put is like this: 35mm is a horse, medium format is a car, large format is a plane. The best 35mm can't beat a standart medium format etc.

In other words, the bigger the format, the better. I mostly shoot medium format (MF) during photo shoots, and just acquired a portable MF system for travel because once you've tried it, you can't go back to only 35mm.

Also, lenses mounted on many MF camera destroy even the best Leica lenses...for as low as 250 bucks used on the internet...yes...I know...awesome.

This is one of the main reasons why many of us still shoot film: it kills the best DSLR in tones, details, file size (once scanned), color information in the file, etc.

However there are downsides to it:

• MF camera are bulky, large format cameras are enormous. The bigger the better, but also the least convenient. I only know of one fully automated MF rangefinder: Fujica GA645. If you know of one, drop me a message !
• MF camera often don't have AF or metering, so you have to measure light with a handheld meter or an other camera. No need to say it is only for those of you who organize photo shoots, or spend time shooting landscapes. If it's to point and shoot, forget it. However it will be greatly rewarding.
• In order to expose manually, you need to know the zone system. I can only recommend this explanation from Luminous Landscape. It sounds like a pain, but if you read this blog you'll be into it :)
• You can only shoot up to 15 images per roll, and film cost a bit, about $3 for a roll of BW, plus $3-5 for negative development only. Then you need to pay for scanning or get yourself a good negative scanner. I use an Epson V700 (review coming soon).

A 3 kilos Mamiya RZ67, a classic studio MF camera

So if you aim at getting few great pictures, weather it is portrait, and even more landscapes, get a MF camera. I'll right a post with recommendation and a complete overview of the market, since it's kinda hard to find exhaustive information on MF products.

What about digital? DX & FX? Well it does not really have an impact on picture quality. Both won't be as good as medium format film anyway, for a cost of gear far higher (disregarding the cost of film). The biggest difference is the crop factor : all your lenses will zoom x1.5 in DX, which can be annoying if you shoot wide angles.

Well now you know it all:

• Casual shooters, stick to digital, DX or FX.
• Landscape photographers, if you shoot digital shoot FX, but otherwise get an MF camera (Mamiya 7II, Pentax 67II or Fuji 680 are my choices for lanscapes, they all have exceptional lenses and built in metering)
• Photographers aiming at subtile tones, large print, great color range, image definition, amazing bokeh, go MF film. And don't tell me it's expensive to buy film, because a mamiya RZ cost $ 800 used with a lens that is heaven sent (sharp as hell at f2.8 and amazing bokeh) ; so you can buy a lot of film with the price difference between this and a digital full frame.
• You love film tones and BW but can't stand the hassle of MF, go 35mm film with a Contax G2 rangefinder (it's a leica 3 times cheaper, no kidding) or a Nikon F100, or FE. I'd go for the Contax, Zeiss lenses for the G series are amazing, but if you're tight on budget go Nikon.

Contax G2, a must have.

An automated MF rangefinder to travel.

I am soon traveling to India, and of course I intend to shoot like my life depends on it. One problem though...I got used to the unmatched pictures of my 6x7 medium format Mamiya RZ67 and can't accept to travel with only digital or 35mm film. Why is it a problem? Well have you seen, and mostly weighted a Mamiya RZ? I call it the Tank for a reason (5.5 pounds to be precise). Not to mention the absence of built in metering. I tried walking around in NYC with it, painful experience. No thanks.

Therefor I ended up entering an exciting yet terrible phase: finding and choosing a new more portable / autonomous MF camera, adapted to street life photography. Starting with the stars: Mamiya 6 and Mamiya 7. Naaaa...metering is dodgy, and bokeh on the one lens that I wanted (75mm F3.5) is crap. They are landscape cameras anyway.

Pentax 67II : excellent camera, but comparable to the Tank itself in size, and sounds like a tank firing when you trigger it. Not for traveling.

Rollei and other TLRs : no metering.

Bronica RF645: a very good choice (ended up #3 on my list), built in metering, 645 format but...

...but Fujicas came along: at first the GW690 series. OMG, 6x9 frames, soo much film, too much actually, no more that 8 shots on a roll of 120 film. And no metering. However those are AMAZING, fantastic lenses, beats Leica M easily, I can only recommend as a second MF camera, and they are cheap as hell used.

I ended up ordering a Fujica GA645 60mm F4. It has an easy to use meter, AF (yes yes, a medium format automated rangefinder), and a lens that compares to the one of its brother the 690. Kind of big Contax G2 :)

Not as amazing optics as Mamiya's, not 6x7, but 15 shots a roll, automated, and equivalent to a 35mm lens in 135 format. It's always a matter of compromise, this was the best for me in order to travel.

Can't wait.