i have often heard comments about how the shift lenses just couldn't compare
to a MF or LF camera with bellows, so i am here to defend these often
criticized zuikos. this isn't directed to anybody specifically, but i feel
that a good explanation of their unique qualities is needed to justify their
price.
for one, there are very few places that a bellows type camera could go w/o
tripod, excessive amounts of film holders, and all the other gadgets that go
along with that type of work. size matters, and when one can get great
shots on an in-expensive format, then that more than justifies the price.
in a word: slides. i wasted far too much money trying to have MF or LF
tyrannies photographed down to 35mm slide format. most architectural
presentations, design award submissions, etc. are done only on 35mm. to
save the time, processing costs and frustration is truly a great savings.
also, getting great detail shots from a building with a 300mm + lens is
where small format shines.
i often wish i could just do 4x5, but for the market it doesn't always sell.
the shift lenses paid for themselves within a few jobs, and now i have them
for personal use whenever i want.
oh, and as for the folder cameras like the graphlex, one can't get all of
the vertical shift of the zuikos, and certainly none of the lateral. only
with a true monorail can one get the perspective correction often needed.
don't discount a shift lens yet - there is much to be discovered! the
cross-shift is very useful and not often realized. ;)
Bob Gries
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|