Leaf AFi-10 in action

[H1/A75 Guy]

[!--quoteo(post=0:date=:name=gwhitf)--][div class=\'quotetop\']QUOTE (gwhitf)[div class=\'quotemain\'][!--quotec--]Of the two bodies, I vastly preferred the Sinar rotating back design, since you could easily look down at the LCD and check your orientation.[/quote]
That argument sounds counter-intuitive, to me. I would think the thumbwheel stops of Leaf Verto would give you an instantaneous 'feel' for the orientation of the sensor without even looking at the camera.

David

[rainer_v]

I looked thru the waist-level, the 45, and the 90 finders on both the Leaf afi and the Sinar Hy6 at Photo East. I think both of them would be nice studio cameras if you were on a tripod or camera stand, and you weren't hurried, or if you shoot catalogue all day.

But for me personally, trying to combine 6x6 and 645, at least in its current state, would not work for me. Too confusing.

When you look thru the finders you see a square image on the ground glass, with the corners of the square gone. If you can imagine that. Imagine a vertical 645 and a horizontal 645 laying on top of each other.

With the Leaf, you have to look down at this icon to see if the back was set to horizontal or vertical. With the Sinar, you had to look down at the LCD to see if you were set to horizontal or vertical. To me, it just added this extra element of doubt and anxiety -- would I shoot the camera in the wrong orientation? Again, you only encounter this anxiety with the hy6 design, since it's the only one based on square potential. Of the two bodies, I vastly preferred the Sinar rotating back design, since you could easily look down at the LCD and check your orientation.

Back in the Dark Ages, I shot a Fuji 680. When the Mark III version of that camera came out, the Finder in the camera had metal blades in it that were coupled to the orientation of the film back. So when you rotated the film back to horizontal, the tiny little men inside the finder put on their work gloves and they physically moved the metal blades inside the finder to show which orientation you were in. In short, it was a BRILLIANT DESIGN, because you always only saw what you were shooting -- either vertical or horizontal. The Mark I and Mark II versions of that camera did not do that, and oftentimes, I'd get in a hurry or be shooting spontaneously and I'd think I was shooting a vertical, and then when the film came back the head and feet were cropped out. Bad design.

So the Hy6 is not for me, unless they introduce a bladed viewfinder. Other than that it seemed like a nice camera, (especially when fitted with the 6x6 film back).

What I want is a simple digital MF camera that feels in my hand like a Mamiya 6 or Mamiya 7, with a four inch or five inch LCD, and it shoots a 31mp RAW file. No bells and whistles. Pure and easy and spontaneous, like the Canon 1ds3, but with a giant viewfinder and a larger file. I can dream...

yes i agree. with my artec i do exactly this. sinar provides some thin black alu frames which are exactly the sensor size. they are magentic and i turn them round if i change the sensor orientation. i like it much more than formerly with the gottschalt where i have had both orientations in one. maybe sinar and leaf shpould think about this detail, does not sound too hard to make here a solution as you are recommending.

[gwhitf]

That argument sounds counter-intuitive, to me. I would think the thumbwheel stops of Leaf Verto would give you an instantaneous 'feel' for the orientation of the sensor without even looking at the camera.

David

What I'm saying is: I don't even want to pick up a camera, (any camera), that forces me to worry about what orientation the back is in. Period. End of story.

When I'm working spontaneously, what I see in that viewfinder is what I want to be captured by the sensor.

I don't want even one ounce of (dwindling) brainpower to be devoted to "which way is the back set to?"

Both the Leaf and the Sinar have a viewfinder with twelves "sides" to it. Not good. One opinion only. Would be fine for repetitious studio work though, I'm sure.

I react to what I see in the viewfinder. Pure and simple. Here is my inner dialogue when looking thru that Leaf/Sinar/Rollei/Whatever: "Ok, the back is set to Vertical, so that means that even though I'm seeing all that extra stuff there on the left and the right, that means it's not really being captured, but that stuff up at the top and at the bottom is being captured, so I'm going to compose the frame accordingly". I've got enough inner brain dialogue when I'm shooting. The viewfinder image should relax a person; not add confusion.

As awkward as it is to turn the camera body on its side, like the Contax or H1 or Canon, I'd rather do that, and always be seeing EXACTLY what I"m shooting, rather than that twelve sided Afi viewfinder image. The Sinar viewfinder simply needs blades. They should buy a Fuji 680 Mark III on ebay (for a hundred bucks), (the greatest camera ever made), and then copy that blade design. Now that I think about it, the blades in the 680 were in the Body; not in the Finder. The finder 90 was just a piece of plastic. But the film back orientation would "talk" to the blades, and they'd stayed in sync with each other.

[yaya]

Frank,
Which lens(es) did you use,
and how's their performance at the extreme edges of the frame?
Thank you,
Billy

90mm Macro @ f11

[attachment=9535:full.jpg] [attachment=9536:100_.jpg]

[Frank Doorhof]

About orientation.
I understand that when you pick up a camera during a show you can feel lost.
However I have shot with several MF systems over the last few months, and can say that the AFi is PERFECT for handheld shooting, it's a very balanced system.
The RZ67ProII even with the grip is a killer to handhold and I mostly use it on a studio stand.

If you want DSLR performance buy a Mamiya 645AFD/III with a back, you can have the same feel of a DSLR but with a large viewfinder and you can turn the camera for portrait or landscape.

Me personally I love to use WLF and with the RZ I have to switch to turn with the AFi I can just use my tumb to turn.
The whole turning the sensor is very easy and is shown in the display how it's orientated.
So before making a judgement go out and try the camera longer than a few seconds

[gwhitf]

So before making a judgement go out and try the camera longer than a few seconds

I am almost fifty years old, sir. A few seconds is all that it takes for me; I know instantly. I have owned and shot every medium format camera made. I recognize good design from mediocre design instantly, for my style of shooting. Again, I spoke for myself and said it was clearly my own opinion. I don't need corrections from you.

I am happy that that camera works for you. Forge ahead.

[Frank Doorhof]

Don't take it as a personal attack I'm not like that
What I meant to say was that when I pick up a camera for the first time I feel very "new" to the system, handling one on an exhibition with people looking and other people waiting will make the experience worse.
When I handled the AFi for the first time it was also very new and weird, after half an hour I shot handheld and without a problem.
I'm 37 at the moment and have to admit I'm a big guy with steady hands so maybe that helps.

Again, no personal attack meant, that's why I posted the smiley.
I just meant that if you tried it out a bit longer you might change your mind.

[gwhitf]

I just meant that if you tried it out a bit longer you might change your mind.

No problem. We're just comparing notes.

Just make sure and never pick up a Mark III Fuji 680, if you've already written the check for the Leaf body, because the Fuji 680 is an illustration of a camera designed properly. My jaw dropped when I first watched those blades change instantly when I rotated the 220 back.

(And how sad that these great old cameras have been left in the dust, ie Fuji 680, RZ, 203FE; yes, there are digital solutions, but they're not elegant solutions.)

[Graham Mitchell]

Of all that is written, I love only what a person has written with his own blood. - Friedrich Nietzsche

[Frank Doorhof]

I never shot with the Fuji but heard a lot of people about it.
I do own a RZ67ProII and am in love with that machine, one of the reasons I don't have an AFi yet myself  the sound of the shutter, the cocking the shutter the ..... well about everything.
And the of course the quality of the glass.
However looking at the disadvatages of the system makes me long for the AFi most of the time, untill I play with it again.
For the more quick work I use the 645AFD/III system and the MarkII 5D soon.

The funny thing is that you can just switch backs between them (well not on the Canon ) and use the best of both worlds.
I won't rule an AFi out by the way, especially when I can switch the back to the RZ I would love to put my 645AFD/III to rest for the AFi.
But I have to justify the costs of a whole new system and I think I can't seeing that 99% of the studio work is done with the RZ and I just love that camera for it's looks, handling.... etc.

Well you know the feeling, you know it isn't better but......

[BJNY]

yes i agree. with my artec i do exactly this. sinar provides some thin black alu frames which are exactly the sensor size. they are magentic and i turn them round if i change the sensor orientation.

Rainer,
any chance you could post a snapshot of the thin black aluminum frames you're referring to, please?

[rethmeier]

As a user of the Hy6,I have to agree with gwhitf.
The mask system of the Hy6/Afi is also my only gripe with the camera,otherwise the camera is great.
I did think about making drop-in mask myself and change while I'm shooting horizontal or vertical.
The arTec magnetic alu frames Rainer mentioned sound like the ideal solution.
Maybe not a solution for everybody,however it would work for me.
Correct the GX680 III was a great camera,I had one as well.

Cheers,

Willem.

[Graham Mitchell]

The mask system of the Hy6/Afi is also my only gripe with the camera,otherwise the camera is great.

I suppose it was much easier in the film days. The exposed area was a fixed 645 size. Now we have so many different sensor sizes to consider (at least 5 MFDB sensor sizes that I can think of).

[gwhitf]

I suppose it was much easier in the film days. The exposed area was a fixed 645 size. Now we have so many different sensor sizes to consider (at least 5 MFDB sensor sizes that I can think of).

* Pentax 6x7
* Fuji 6x8
* Fuji 6x9
* RZ 6x7
* Contax 6x4.5
* Mamiya 6x4.5
* Hasselblad 6x6
* Hasselblad 6x4.5

Film was all over the place too. The real issue was that, out of all those cameras, the RZ and the 680 were never meant to turn on their side to shoot a vertical.

I don't know how the RZ dealt with the vertical/horizontal issue, but I do know that, when shooting people fast and furious, with the Mark I and II, it was VERY easy to blow it, and shoot many frames in a row in the wrong orientation. I'm sure that Fuji had enough complaints that, by the time the Mark III came out, the blades were in place and solved the problem completely.

To my memory, the Leaf Afi has a tiny icon inside the viewfinder too, to show the orientation, but let's be honest -- when the light is fading, and you're on location, and it's crazy pressure, the LAST thing in the world you're going to do is look at that stupid icon. You need to be seeing exactly what you're shooting.

[Frank Doorhof]

The AFi has the indication, the RZ has blades coming into place masking the area.

To be honest all is getting used to and using it.

[Graham Mitchell]

Film was all over the place too.

I meant for a given camera. One a 6x6 camera using 645 framing, there were only 2 possible frame guide positions.

[rainer_v]

Rainer,
any chance you could post a snapshot of the thin black aluminum frames you're referring to, please?

its magnetic.
very precise framing and practical.

[BJNY]

Thank you, Rainer.

Thierry, would you see if the arTec magnetic mask will fit onto the Hy6?

[rethmeier]

BJNY
I was asking the same question.
I'm planning on purchasing a set of masks from Sinar and alter them to fit my Hy6.
The only issue I can see that I would have to remove the viewfinder every-time to change from portrait to landscape.

It would certainly be better than the current mask.

Cheers,
Willem.

[rainer_v]

BJNY
I was asking the same question.
I'm planning on purchasing a set of masks from Sinar and alter them to fit my Hy6.
The only issue I can see that I would have to remove the viewfinder every-time to change from portrait to landscape.

It would certainly be better than the current mask.

Cheers,
Willem.

yes ask sinar. actually i dont have an idea if they went in the artec as serial accessory or not.
it was just that i asked for a precise screen because i compose different  if i see exactly what i get.  
i wanted a rotatable mate screen but someone came up with this magnetic mask  idea, which is cheaper and better.
one of many real little details which make the work with the artec so nice.