This being said, it really is possible to shoot a D3 like a 4x5 camera even without a tripod, and that's mostly how I have been using mine. I don't remember the last time where I set the camera to Ch/Cl, so it really is a state of mind that can be worked on. Having experience shooting 4x5 is IMHO of great help here.
Above makes sense; that indeed experience from a larger format helps. Many do not have that. Photography is about seeing, planning, anticipating and a slower camera simply helps you see and learn to see more carefully and to plan photos. Though there is far more to 4x5 than just a tripod...
When reading between the lines in posts it seem otherwise there are people with DSLRs and only DSLR experience that advocate that a DSLR is the kill for medium format which is plain utter ignorant nonsense, or if they shot medium format seems they missed the photography part. Feel free to strangle me if you wish, but I think they miss the seeing part, in essence what important real photography is. Sure, when snapping a shot of an animal some automation helps. If I return to Africa again though I would happily do so with my Mamiya 645 based MFDB... simply one can plan and anticipate such shots too... and by limited planned shooting succeed in far better shots. That in fact saves time processing etc also. And yes, the Mamiya 645 is AF, though not fast such. Walking round in Shanghai old town at 7am Wednesday morning I carried my Mamiya 7 and FILM. That was a reflection... of actually how light a camera used for film can be... even when medium format lighter than many DSLR. B.t.w. when I first visited Africa was in 2001 and before I got deep interested in photography. I carried a twenty year old Canon AV-1 w/ 35-70mm f/4 zoom and a failing lens mount and shot on Kodak Gold negs. Even such setup can yield good photos. Not sure if the world really need DSLRs even, but granted quality film labs for slides are very scarce...
Photography was still photography with FILM 35mm & 120. There is no difference today, except we have choices of digital such. There is still a difference between smaller formats and larger. Or is there not? How about for you DSLR shooters who claim that DSLR beats medium format, how about point and shoots beating your guns?? Forums are full of one thing; being sold of megapixel.What is megapixel? It is number of dots on an area. The area is still same size no matter how many are the dots. Lets remember the important that area of sensor/film planes make different too, and in how that relates to an image. Likewise newer technology sensors are improvements to the ones they replace. Is there any sensor though that gives same sensation as Fuji Velvia? None, although Aptus gets close in that direction... but do not match in color rendering.
I think this is my last post in this thread. Forums have become a tad tiring and boring, seeming all about gear. LL is rapid becoming like Dpreview... there are more things in life to do... I do enjoy the photography part. That part is also reading. I should get back to that book by Ansel Adams... The Negative, which is reflecting really, of that and what it says is still relevant today, also for digital. There are parallels. Medium format was different, but it also is today. To myself it has felt as it has aided me in a rapid advancement in photography. It is not the gear, but seeing. It is about previsualizing an image! These to me have yielded in a much increased joy in having stepped into medium format. Digital though has complicated it, more difficult... because many choices... and change of camera is not as simple as change of film was. I was stuck with the faulty ZD, and indeed... digital does cost far more than N rolls of film, $$$.
Anders