When Bigger Isn't Better

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Nathan King, Mar 20, 2016.

  1. Nathan King

    Nathan King Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 19, 2013
    Omaha, NE
    I recently cut back on my black and white architectural medium format film photography after becoming sensitive to darkroom chemicals and being unable to preview my compositions due to the discontinuation of FP-3000B for my Polaroid back. I wasn't sure if Micro Four-Thirds would fit my way of working and be able to provide me with the tonality I am accustomed to in large prints, but the size of the bodies and lenses really appealed to me. After working with my E-M5 Mk.II for several months I can say with certainty that my concerns were completely unfounded.

    My Olympus body with the 12-40mm f2.8 lens is smaller, lighter, and more versatile than my Hasselblad with one prime lens. What shocked me the most was the malleability of the "small" 16 megapixel raw files. Tones can be shifted to match even the most extreme vision without any fear of quality degradation. My 16x20 digital silver gelatin prints look more crisp than my film prints ever did. The overall look is a bit different, and I'm still learning the nuances of the digital darkroom but am very content with the results. This is a camera system that gets out of the way and allows me to focus on getting the image I want. I think most people lusting after huge cameras are insane. :coco: :biggrin:

    • Like Like x 6
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Informative Informative x 2
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.