>>3705782They’re a lot higher now than when I had one. I used my RB67 for portraits, and at f/4.5 to f/5.6 180mm it became an issue shooting portraits outdoors when it’s overcast or in otherwise shade, which is where I wanted to shoot portraits. I could just barely get away with 1/125th shutter speed with ISO400 speed. As the lens below lost a stop of exposure.
I also did notice a fair chunk of grain in some of my images I didn’t like depending what film I was using. But I was scanning with a flextight 949 so the grain was in sharp focus. Most colour film that annoyed me with it. B&W it looked really nice with some films like GP3.
$1000 isn’t cheap. You may not remember but these prices have shot way up from what they used to be.
What are you going to define as a medium format look? DoF? My A7s has thinner DoF than any lens I had on the RB67.
I think the look is much crisper clearer edges and a cleaner image. Prior to good digital, even with great detail in 35mm you end up with grain, and you’d have soft edges, edge transitions between contrasting objects kind of have a roll off and transition instead of maintaining the contrast. Like if you had some mountains against a sky, the detail in the trees and mountain would be great, but you’d have grain and the edge of the mountains against the sky would appear soft.
