dazedgonebye
Veteran
Got me...but I'll find a way to make you pay. 
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
40mm equivalent will be fine by me. I trust it will take both 120 and 220. And if it has the ability to accept another format (6x4.5?) that would be great, but 6x7 cameras don't seem to have that capability.
pvdhaar
Peter
One of the caveats when talking about focal length equivalents between 35mm and 6x6/6x7 are the rather different aspect ratios.
It has always struck me how much wider an 80mm on 6x6 appears than a 40-ish lens on 35mm film. Both focal lengths may be the same as the frame's diagonal, but the difference lies in the short side of 36mmx24mm frame. Especially if you also factor in that printing is rarely ever done full frame, or that slide mounts also gobble up some of the edges.
Cropping away 1mm top and bottom of 24mm high frame is much more invasive from taking away the same of a 56mm frame. The net result is that 80mm is ca. 1.5x the 6x6 frame side as printed, and 40mm is ca. 1.8x the short side of small format as printed, and so much 'roomier' (is that a word?).
In my book 80mm on MF 6x6/6x7 is perfect.
It has always struck me how much wider an 80mm on 6x6 appears than a 40-ish lens on 35mm film. Both focal lengths may be the same as the frame's diagonal, but the difference lies in the short side of 36mmx24mm frame. Especially if you also factor in that printing is rarely ever done full frame, or that slide mounts also gobble up some of the edges.
Cropping away 1mm top and bottom of 24mm high frame is much more invasive from taking away the same of a 56mm frame. The net result is that 80mm is ca. 1.5x the 6x6 frame side as printed, and 40mm is ca. 1.8x the short side of small format as printed, and so much 'roomier' (is that a word?).
In my book 80mm on MF 6x6/6x7 is perfect.
Tuolumne
Veteran
One of the caveats when talking about focal length equivalents between 35mm and 6x6/6x7 are the rather different aspect ratios.
It has always struck me how much wider an 80mm on 6x6 appears than a 40-ish lens on 35mm film. Both focal lengths may be the same as the frame's diagonal, but the difference lies in the short side of 36mmx24mm frame. Especially if you also factor in that printing is rarely ever done full frame, or that slide mounts also gobble up some of the edges.
Cropping away 1mm top and bottom of 24mm high frame is much more invasive from taking away the same of a 56mm frame. The net result is that 80mm is ca. 1.5x the 6x6 frame side as printed, and 40mm is ca. 1.8x the short side of small format as printed, and so much 'roomier' (is that a word?).
In my book 80mm on MF 6x6/6x7 is perfect.
And that is why I no longer have my chromes mounted. You have to kiss good bye to too much slide real estate when you scan it if it's mounted.
/T
kuzano
Veteran
While we are waiting for Photokina hoping to see the official announcement from Fuji about their new retro design folder camera. I would like to put out a poll about the desired focal length equal to 35mm.
The wikipedia on the GF670 lists the 80mm lens (already chosen as shown on the prototype), is the 35mm equivalent of 35mm focal length.
Ernst Dinkla
Well-known
80 mm on 6x7 is 39 0n 24x36
80 mm on 6x7 is 39 0n 24x36
On the diagonal of 56x82 mm (typical 6x9 size) it would be the equivalent of 35 on 24x36 mm. On 56x72 mm (Linhof ideal format) it is like a 38 mm lens on 24x36 mm. But many brands nibble at the frame size length and you are lucky if it is 70 mm, some go down to 67 mm. Then it's more like 40 mm in my book and not WA enough. Not to speak of the chance the lens actually is 82 mm and gets the label 80 mm.
Ernst Dinkla
80 mm on 6x7 is 39 0n 24x36
The wikipedia on the GF670 lists the 80mm lens (already chosen as shown on the prototype), is the 35mm equivalent of 35mm focal length.
On the diagonal of 56x82 mm (typical 6x9 size) it would be the equivalent of 35 on 24x36 mm. On 56x72 mm (Linhof ideal format) it is like a 38 mm lens on 24x36 mm. But many brands nibble at the frame size length and you are lucky if it is 70 mm, some go down to 67 mm. Then it's more like 40 mm in my book and not WA enough. Not to speak of the chance the lens actually is 82 mm and gets the label 80 mm.
Ernst Dinkla
sanmich
Veteran
6x9 with 50mm equiv..
Yummy!
Yummy!
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Yes, Fuji do like to do wide lenses, so I'd expect to see a 35mm equivalent at launch and a 28mm equivalent after six months. That way we'll all buy two cameras!
Much like their Klasse W and Klasse S strategy a year or so ago.
I'm waiting for the 6x7 folder, and hoping they do something twenty first century design-wise such as replacing the traditional 'leather' with carbon fiber or neoprene.
Also, when they launched the Natura cameras they had Natura film to match. I wonder if there will be a range of 6x7 films for the new camera, perhaps following Rollei's film initiatve but taking it into color too.
One more week to go until Photokina 2008.
Much like their Klasse W and Klasse S strategy a year or so ago.
I'm waiting for the 6x7 folder, and hoping they do something twenty first century design-wise such as replacing the traditional 'leather' with carbon fiber or neoprene.
Also, when they launched the Natura cameras they had Natura film to match. I wonder if there will be a range of 6x7 films for the new camera, perhaps following Rollei's film initiatve but taking it into color too.
One more week to go until Photokina 2008.
Share: