|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
02-28-2019, 09:56 AM
|
| |
As I said, the link in the OP is about equivalence.
Thanks for the kindergarten lesson. I hope you were doing it for your benefit, not mine.
It was called the ideal format because it enlarged to 8x10 with minimal cropping, unlike the more common at the time square format 6x6 cm that was essentially a 645 if one was making common print sizes.
Everything in life is a compromise. If in your real life shooting you are willing to compromise quality, stay with 35mm. I found for field photography that 4x5 was the better choice, medium format was good for studio portraiture and 35mm was excellent for pictures of my cats.
What we should be thinking twice about is how much quality are we willing to give up for the sake of convenience.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
02-27-2019, 02:44 PM
|
| |
A lens on at f5.6 gives exactly the same amount of exposure as any lens at f5.6 regardless of format.
All the link in the op is doing is playing the equivalence game.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
02-27-2019, 02:40 PM
|
| |
No, what we would agree on is that as you increase the length of the box, you are increasing the focal length, thereby "stopping down" your pinhole camera.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
02-27-2019, 07:24 AM
|
| |
Another article from people who enjoy seeing their words on a screen, but have little understanding of their subject.
From a “needing more light” perspective, no. Medium format doesn’t “need more light”.
A medium format frame needs exactly the same amount of light as a same speed 35mm frame to secure similar exposure.
Interestingly, they assign a thing called an f-stop to lenses, and even more interestingly, if you set a medium format lens to the same f-stop as a 35mm lens, they will project the same intensity of light within the limits of their individual calibrations.
Medium format will give somewhat less depth of field for any given aperture than 35mm, but that is a different conversation.
|
