I am having a good time about Linhof 617 discussions I started.

[YDegroot@xxxxxxx]

Wow, I post something  and we have a hot discussion going about formats,
angles of views, pros and cons of about 100 degeres versus 140 or so degrees.
I am just having a good laugh.

I personally agree with the gentleman who says that the 1:3 perspecitve is
more satisfying that the 1:2. And what I personally dislike are the
distortions of the rotational cameras, especially those with too wide lenses.

A 120 film rotation camera gives a far more pleasing effect with a 110 or
120mm lens. Look e.g. at the book The Italians gardens by Geoffry James, taken
with a Kodak No. 4D I believe. Yes, you can crop anything that's too wide off
a Noblex, e.g..

I had 4 rotation cameras ("love all things, examine all things" (I Cor. 13) 

Kodak No.1: nice perspective, but lens wasn't sharp enough for serious work.
Sold it.

I had the Noblex 150, 120film: very sharp; but lens too wide. Disliked the
effects. Sold it after a while.

Same can be said for the Noblex 135mm, which I bought to sell. Tried one roll,
and disliked it as much.

I also once had the Russian FT-2, just for fun. Great perepctive, upward
shifted 50mm lens, and too bad, camera's lens not sharp enough for serious
work.

I seriously wish someone would make a modern FT-2, with 35mm regular film
loading, more speeds, and a tack sharp lens. That would be my pocket camera!

Anyway, the Linhof 617 second model is worth about $2,200 to $2,500. Remember,
there is a filter included. Those suckers cost a lot of money as well.

I own a Linhof 617, third incarnation (non-interchangeable), and the ND
Schneider filter is worth a lot by itself. I am talking around $700.00. I have
seen it costing as much as $900.00

Anyway, the Linhof 617, in whatever incarnation is a better choice than the
fixed Fuji 617.  I know I may get flack for saying this, but the Linhof lens
is far superior than the 105 lens. I have etsted the Fujhi and Linhof
together; I know what I say is true. No disrespect to Fuji; Linhof is just
better. 

So, let's have fun and discuss this a bit further. What I enjoy is that every
one swears than their own preference is the best.I do, and so does anyone
else. Fine. No problem.

I agree, with a rotational camera you can take distortion free photos. Yes,
but there is a catch: the scenery has to cooperate with you, like a river in
front, or large mountains, fields, etc. That is: as long as the foreground is
kind of the same stuff, like flowers, water, etc.

Enough babbling! 

The botom line is this:

It doesn't matter, as long as you are happy with the results, and as long as
you can give joy to others. 

Just never take pictures with a camera that works against your own personal
artistic vision.

Different visions is not like apples and oranges, even though cameras are
externally. What matters is the internal unique vision. The camera is merely
an instrument by which to express this vision. For me that is mostly the 1:3
non-rotational camera vision. 

Photography happens first in the heart and mind, secondly with the camera. But
the camera must be part of this unity.

Happy shooting!