| Author | Message |
|---|
maericks
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 21 |  Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2004 8:24 pm
| Quote: |
On 2004-04-24 16:49, t.r.sanford wrote:
How do the lenses compare when used to photograph a backlit subect. with the light source visible in the scene?
|
I'm waiting for more 620 spools. I'll try to do a side-by-side comparison of the two lenses (same film, same subject) when I get set up.
--Mark |
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2165 | Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2004 9:45 pm
| Quote: |
On 2004-04-30 13:24, maericks wrote:| Quote: |
On 2004-04-24 16:49, t.r.sanford wrote:
How do the lenses compare when used to photograph a backlit subect. with the light source visible in the scene?
|
I'm waiting for more 620 spools. I'll try to do a side-by-side comparison of the two lenses (same film, same subject) when I get set up.
--Mark
|
Hmm. I must have missed somethihg. Why are you waiting for 620 spools?
Cheers,
Dan |
|
Henry
Joined: 09 May 2001
Posts: 1662 | Posted: Sat May 01, 2004 8:28 pm
Because he missed the 6:15...? |
|
maericks
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 21 | Posted: Sat May 01, 2004 10:24 pm
| Quote: |
On 2004-05-01 13:28, Henry wrote:
Because he missed the 6:15...?
|
The 100mm F3.5 is part of a Kodak Medalist, which takes 620 film. No 620 spools means no way to take pictures on film.... |
|
Dan Fromm
Joined: 14 May 2001
Posts: 2165 | Posted: Sun May 02, 2004 11:40 am
| Quote: |
On 2004-05-01 15:24, maericks wrote:| Quote: |
On 2004-05-01 13:28, Henry wrote:
Because he missed the 6:15...?
|
The 100mm F3.5 is part of a Kodak Medalist, which takes 620 film. No 620 spools means no way to take pictures on film....
|
Ah. And here I'd been thinking that you were going to use the lens on a Graphic. Silly, silly, me. Thanks for the clarification.
Cheers,
Dan |
|
