MF print quality

[noah b]

Hey guys, I've been shooting with a fuji gsw690II for the past few months and love it. It is getting to be cumbersome since I've been on the road quite a bit as of late, which is leading me towards selling it and acquiring a 6x4.5 fuji RF. The one thing I'm concerned with is final print quality between the two formats. I usually scan my negatives at 1200dpi with grain reduction and digital ice. For bigger prints I rescan at higher dpi. With digital prints, is there a difference between the two formats? That is the only thing that is holding me back from making the move.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Also consider the size of your prints... Prints after scans are (almost always) done at 300dpi, and that's a lot less sharp than direct, optical enlargement from a great negative... Apart, to preserve all detail in MF you need to scan each frame to more than 200Mb, and to see that level of detail, you need to make really large digital prints and view them from the appropriate distance. For normal sizes the difference between formats in digital printing is less noticeable than it is when we compare wet prints...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[skibeerr]

What will be your biggest print? You need not worry if you only print up to 8x10.
I got good prints from 6x4.5 on 60x50 paper

You should also consider the ratio 2x3 or 3x4.

the GW has the same ratio as a 35mm negative, the 6x4.5 comes closer to the ideal format of 6x7, as I print whet I can get a full frame 6x4.5 on 30x40 paper or have to crop less on the bigger formats.

Also consider the Bessa III.

Wim

 

[Jamie123]

What are you scanning with?

 

[noah b]

Scanning with an epson v700, considering getting a glass negative insert from better scanning since my color negatives are always curly.

I'm thinking 30x40 will be my biggest print size. As of now I'm using fuji 400h, but am going to switch to the ISO 160 film.

I scanned a 35mm negative at a high dpi, made a 13x19 print out of it and there is hardly any grain. That's why I was concerned about print qualities etc.

 

[binky]

I can't speak of the 6x4.5 quality though as I'm unfamiliar with the format. Personally, MF doesn't even begin for me until 6x6 or 6x7...

I agree

I think it will be easier to go from 6x9 to a 6x6 or 6x7 than go 645 (not that a 645 wouldn't be a fantastic camera). As mentioned before, there are other cameras that would be more portable, like a good folder. Or unless the lens is fixed to the body, I would unmount for travel storage (like a Mamiya). Just for your consideration...

 

[aizan]

since 30x40cm is going to be your largest print size, 6x4.5 will be just fine. 12x18 is my normal "big" print size, and 6x9 is overkill. there are 6x4.5 and 6x7/6x6 rangefinders in my future, too. 🙂

 

[Jamie123]

Scanning with an epson v700, considering getting a glass negative insert from better scanning since my color negatives are always curly.

I'm thinking 30x40 will be my biggest print size. As of now I'm using fuji 400h, but am going to switch to the ISO 160 film.

I scanned a 35mm negative at a high dpi, made a 13x19 print out of it and there is hardly any grain. That's why I was concerned about print qualities etc.

The V700 is a decent scanner but you're not going to be outresolving the grain anyways so I wouldn't worry about using ISO 400 film.