[Jewelltrail]

The M 50 f 1.7 in some very low, incandescent lighting.

Attached Images

 

[8540tomg]

The M 400/5.6 is getting to be my walk around lens. A tad on the hefty size perhaps but interesting.

Green Heron (Juvenile)













Tom G

[Canada_Rockies]

Great shots with the old girl, Tom.

In a week we are going on our annual long trek (2 weeks this year), and my 400mm baby just came back from Vintage Visuals where she got a complete CLA and tightening of the tripod shoe. I think she'll get a good workout. We will be starting in Wells Gray Provincial Park (family reunion is there this year), carrying on to Jasper National Park, and then for the weekend of the 22/23 Elk Island National Park which has one of two remaining small herds of Woods Bison. We've never been there. My daughter and her husband will join us for the Elk Island weekend, and I am absolutely certain whe will be bringing the K200d she bought. She might even borrow one of two of Daddy's lenses while we are there.

This week I am busy getting my photos up in the Fernie Arts Co-op so that maybe I can get a few photo shekels for new toys.

[Marc Sabatella]

From the M28/2.8 last weekend at Arches National Park:

[8540tomg]

Beautiful image Marc. Well done.

Thanks Albert. All little PF in some of those but I had to take what the heron would give me.

Enjoy the reunion and Jasper. We shall be expecting great shots upon your return.

Tom G

[Barnster]

From the M28/2.8 last weekend at Arches National Park:

Sensational!It goes to prove what a M series lens is capable off.Marc,what body did you use for this shot?

[Marc Sabatella]

Thanks for the comments! It was taken with the K200D; ISO 200, 1/45", probably f/8 or f/11.

I should also mention that it did take more than the usual amount of finesse in PP to get the relationships between the sky, the clouds, the sunlit areas of the rocks, the shadow areas of the rocks, the foreground, and the background to all look the way I wanted. The original had a rather harsher contrast - the sky close to blown out, the shadows dark enough to be hard to read, not much middle ground. I suppose what I did is sort of "HDR-like", although I tried to keep it believable, and only one exposure was used.

I took a whole bunch of pictures at Arches that day (Saturday), but this was the only one I felt needed that kind of PP to get what I was after. That's not a reflection on the lens, but on the lighting.

[Canada_Rockies]

Thanks for the comments! It was taken with the K200D; ISO 200, 1/45", probably f/8 or f/11.

I should also mention that it did take more than the usual amount of finesse in PP to get the relationships between the sky, the clouds, the sunlit areas of the rocks, the shadow areas of the rocks, the foreground, and the background to all look the way I wanted. The original had a rather harsher contrast - the sky close to blown out, the shadows dark enough to be hard to read, not much middle ground. I suppose what I did is sort of "HDR-like", although I tried to keep it believable, and only one exposure was used.

I took a whole bunch of pictures at Arches that day (Saturday), but this was the only one I felt needed that kind of PP to get what I was after. That's not a reflection on the lens, but on the lighting.

Marc, I have had some good results with this type of contrast situation using RAW at low ISO in AdobeRBG colour space. I take the RAW image and create copies (virtual in LR) at 1 stop under and 1 stop over the original image and pass the two copies only through Photomatix using the Highlight and Shadow option. This makes for a quite believable result, and to my eyes at least works better than using all three images.

I am wondering how your workflow for the above image differs. I am always open to learning a new trick, particularly if it is easier.

[jsherman999]

The M 50 f 1.7 in some very low, incandescent lighting.

.

Incredible capture. Almost afraid to ask, but is there a story behind that shot?

[Marc Sabatella]

Marc, I have had some good results with this type of contrast situation using RAW at low ISO in AdobeRBG colour space. I take the RAW image and create copies (virtual in LR) at 1 stop under and 1 stop over the original image and pass the two copies only through Photomatix using the Highlight and Shadow option. This makes for a quite believable result, and to my eyes at least works better than using all three images.

I am wondering how your workflow for the above image differs. I am always open to learning a new trick, particularly if it is easier.

Sorry this is venturing off-topic, but what the heck:

In ACDSee Pro, the most useful tool for stuff like this is the one called "Lighting" ("Advanced" tab) in the version I am using (3.0 beta); a similar but not quite as sophisticated tool was called Shadow/Highlight in previous versions. It's a form of local contrast enhancement, more or less. I gather it must be somewhat similar to the shadow/highlight tools in Adobe products, but from what people more familiar with the latter than I am say on the ACDSee forums, this is one area where ACDSee really outshines Adobe. I have no idea if what I'm going to describe will make sense using ACR controls or not.

I had shot using the histogram religiously to keep as much data in the middle as I could, but I had the sky just clipping here. So what I did was start by adding highlight enhancement to recover some of the detail from the sky and clouds I also move the midtones slider slightly to the right on the Levels/Curves control, to bring the tone of the sunlit areas down a bit (making them less pale). Then I turned to the Lighting tool for the rest. I dragged down on the far right side of the Lighting graph, to bring out the detail and color in the sky and clouds by through the use of local darkening. I also added some local darkening to the mid-right side of the graph, roughly corresponding to where the sunlit areas were, to further deepen the tones there. I also dragged up slightly on the top side of the same graph, which makes the highlights *within* those sunlit areas a bit brighter (again, enhancing local contrast). I did the same to a somewhat greater extent for the left side of the graph, which locally lightened the shadow areas (eg, the darker areas within the shadow stayed, but the relatively lighter areas got lighter). This had the effect of both bringing out detail in the shadows but also creating a sense of reflected light.

Sounds like a lot when I describe it in this kind of detail, but it's all done in one application from one window - "Develop" mode - in just six drag operations. Not counting false starts and experimentation, of course. But because I'm fairly practiced with these tools and had a pretty good sense of what I wanted and what it would take to get me there, it took me probably all of 20 seconds.

[chhayanat]

Re. Mark Sabatella's landscape picture. This is an excellent result and very close to what the eye must have seen. I find that digital shadows are even more solid than film shadows, but in this particular photograph, I wonder what could have been done in the studio to get the contrast where Mark has got it?

[chhayanat]

Got a 135 f3.5 this week.. what a little beauty this lens is!

This is one of the best SMCP-M lenses in any category, judging from the photographic evidence. It was never much in demand, being eclipsed by the 100/2.8 which was the portrait lens for 35mm, at least according to the magazines. Digital at that time was confined to the Red Book CD.
While paying tribute to the lens let us not forget the photographer's skill and the Grace of the Almighty who provided the light.

[Jewelltrail]

jsherman999: Incredible capture. Almost afraid to ask, but is there a story behind that shot?

Thanks J--I see what you mean; it does look, possibly, like a powerful moment of shared family sadness. However, the opposite is true. It is our family reunion, and my mother (grandmother) is joyfully playing a version of hide and seek with one of her grandchildren which they have shared now for years. The celebration of joy (the facial expressions are hidden) was poignant, though not obvious in this photo!

[Jewelltrail]

8540tomg: Haven't contributed much to the M Club of late. Here's a few from the M 400/5.6 today. A few birds stood still so I shot them.

The last couple of years, when I visited the ADKs in the High Peaks area, I ran into Cedar Waxwings. I am yet to get a shot of them this nice though--great work! The finish of their feathering is so smooth that is takes nice glass and perfect focus to have the shots sharp.

[jsherman999]

.

Just picked up an M 28 f/2.8 from a local shop for a good price - haven't had
one since I sold my copy to Ryno last summer.

I have three 28mm's now - like 50's, each is a little different, I guess.


These are all wide-open test snaps, most cropped to some degree to get a close
look at OOf rendering and center sharpness: