🚀 go-pugleaf

Frank Sereno <fserenonospam@nospamsbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> Frank Sereno <fserenonospam@nospamsbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> Robert Bonomi wrote:
>>>> barbie gee <booger@nosespam.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 17 Jun 2009, Cydrome Leader wrote:
>> 
>>>>>> Anybody have a working Mamiya 645 Pro for sale?
>>>>>> The version of the Pro doesn't really matter.
>> 
>>>>> This is a camera?
>>>>> digital or what?
>> 
>>>> It's a "medium format" film camera, intended for the professional
>>>> photographer.  the negative is about 3x the size of full-frame 35mm.
>> 
>>> So what are this camera's main uses?  Would it be for portraits? 
>>>  Yeah, I know I could Google the information, but we almost 
>>> never have a good conversation in this group so I figured why not 
>>> ask, maybe we'll learn something interesting.
>> 
>> It takes 120 film, I think. I have a couple of twin-lense reflex cameras
>> that take 120. They are handy for outdoor scenes. Because you take the
>> shot at about waist height, generally, you're not looking down on your
>> subject.
>> 
>> The Mamiya is an SLR variation, on the twin-lense concept as you still
>> look down through the top but through the actual lense. I assume the
>> image isn't reversed as it would be in twin lense, but I've never used one.
>> 
>> Hasselblad is SLR medium format, but you look through the back. When the
>> mechanism moves out of the way, you can feel the camera vibrate. I've never
>> been convinced that the image doesn't blur slightly at times. It's a big
>> mechanism versus 35mm SLR.
>> 
>> I used to shoot 120 Kodachrome. Alas, it's not manufactured anymore.
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info!  Digital is killing film photography except 
> for a handful of applications.  Photography today is less of an 
> art than it was back 20 years ago or more.

the lineup of film still being made is really confusing. 

in color, you have kodak and fuji. fuji, being japanese uses letters that 
have no meaning at all for their films, or names that have no meaning and 
all sound the same.

kodak on the other hand just keeps discontinuing stuff, then making new 
products with old sounding names, or they change how the packaging looks 
to cause even more confusion.

So apparently the 100 and 400 Ultra Color films were just discontinued, 
and replaced (according to the people at calumet, as kodak doesn't say on 
their website at all) with somethin called "Ektar 100".

in black and white, it's kodak and ilford.

ilford had pretty color coded boxes.

I think the kodak line is down to just two types, tri-x and tmax. I have 
no idea what the difference is between the two.