----- Original Message -----
From: "Fox, Robert" <RFox@aarp.org>
> Are there any practical reasons to shoot at 4x5 rather than 8x10?
4x5 is more, well, "practical": smaller, less costly to operate, easier to carry
and you don't have to get a second mortage to buy an enlarger (if you wanted
larger than 8x10 prints, and eventually you would), 4x5 enlargers are readily
available. Also, you could buy an inexpensive "real" 4x5 camera and use it for
pinhole work, i.e.: grey calumet, super graphic, any of the other graphic press
cameras, etc.
> I suppose it would be easy enough to do both
That's right. My first 8x10 was a cardboard box.
> but I'm wondering about people's
> preferences for architectural and portrait work. The multi-format Zero2000
> looks like a good starter as well given the choice of formats for standard
> roll film.
You can't go wrong with a Zero2000 they are truly functional pieces of art!
Welcome to the list.
Guillermo
Received on Mon Aug 12 10:01:16 2002
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon 13 Dec 2004 - 23:18:46 PST