"Gordon Moat" <moat@attglobal.net> wrote in message news:3F1AC808.983CE93D@attglobal.net...

> David Ruether wrote:

> > "Gordon Moat" <moat@attglobal.net> wrote in message ...

> Had one once, and traded it for a nice FE and a 105 mm f2.5. The slow flash sync and odd flash connector

> were things I did not like about the F3. However, the viewfinder was about the nicest I have used in 35 mm

> SLRs. I think if I could have found a need to get additional viewfinders, then I would have probably kept

> it. It was nice to just take off the viewfinder for waist level style focusing, or for low level work,

> though it was rare to do that. I am not slamming the F3, and I do think it is one of the all time great

> SLRs.

Ah, yes - there is the flash system on the F3 - but it can be good for some things.

Used with slow film and the AS-7 or remote cord, you can set TTL fill-ratios,

which could not be done as easily until much later (though you can also do it

with the FE, setting ASA "wrong" by the amount of fill-ration wanted, then

compensating the ambient light exposure by reading the needle in the appropriately

"wrong" location...;-)

> > I would not bother. There are better lenses around for 645 that are not

> > expensive (Mamiya wides are really good [my 45mm f2.8 is good to the

> > corners wide-open!]), and these fit the old, inexpensive-but-excellent

> > Mamiya SLR bodies of 20+ years ago...

> I had a complete M645 outfit about 10 years ago (purchased used). While it may have been possible that the

> camera outfit was somewhat abused, it looked to be in excellent condition. I simply had too many problems

> with that one, and it soured me on Mamiya. I have rented an RZ67 since then, and handled a 7II rangefinder,

> and find both to be better constructed. The newer 645 gear from Mamiya may be better, but I would likely go

> Bronica ETRSi in 645 in the used choices.

I've had excellent luck with a few old Mamiya 645 SLRs (and Mamiya still

services them[!]), and the lenses for it are generally top-class, and the VFs

are sharp. I've seen too many poor Bronica 645/6x6 lenses to take it seriously,

and the VFs aren't as good as the early Mamiya's...

> > > Very few Nikkor lenses go to f32. It can be interesting on the few that do this. I realize that the

> > > image does get softer, though sometimes that unique look compliments and image. Macro is definitely

> > > one good example of this.

> > Ummm, not for me - I like "crisp" images, even when most of the image is out of focus

> > (see: www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/sunplant1.html ). Which leads me to liking "bad bokeh", too...;-)

> Some nice images there. I see what you mean about the harsh background in a couple images. I find I like

> "b17.jpg" the best, and I like the way the highlights frame the plant. Nice colour as well.

> Gordon Moat

> Alliance Graphique Studio

> <http://www.allgstudio.com>

I like the "sharp" "backgrounds" - which permit handling the whole image area

as a graphic whole, instead of pretending that there is a "subject" and a

separate "background"...;-)

--

David Ruether

d_ruether@hotmail.com

http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com