Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-29-2016, 08:17 PM   #16
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 23
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gavincato Quote
i use the zeiss 110/2 and the 80/2 on my 645z and they are amazing lenses, but your b&w examples the blacks are so heavily crushed any samples i show you really wouldn't have any relevance
Seems like many people are saying that my "blacks are heavily crushed" like its a bad thing.

Why?

I can show you many photographers, particularly in street photography and fashion, that have the same sort of approach.

02-29-2016, 09:03 PM   #17
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 20
QuoteOriginally posted by bilbrown Quote
Seems like many people are saying that my "blacks are heavily crushed" like its a bad thing.

Why?

I can show you many photographers, particularly in street photography and fashion, that have the same sort of approach.
I don't think there is an aesthetic aversion to your choices, I think it was more about that you're trying to achieve a look like your Leica which doesn't have crushed blacks, while your 645Z shots do. I think the point is, that's a starting place. For example, the first image, if you look at the nose shadow, it's black. The Leica image that follows is also similarly contrasty, but the nose shadow isn't totally dark.

Personally, as an art director, I would choose your 645Z work over the Leica work. I think it expresses the look you are going for better than the Leica. It has the grunge and attitude that I would want for fashion (and is I assume why you like the front flash look), while remaining refined and elevated enough (due to the smooth tonality and resolution) to not be cheap or too punk rock (for high fashion).

The Leica shot looks like precision. The 645Z looks more like caviar.
02-29-2016, 09:17 PM   #18
Pentaxian
dcshooter's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Washington DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,482
I only initially brought it up because they are not crushed nearly as much in your Leica images, which show quite a bit more shadow detail and are a huge component of the difference in the looks you have achieved between the two, differences you yourself said you want to eliminate. In your 645Z photos, the shadows have clipped and disappeared into mud. Some work with curves during initial processing (presuming you are shooting RAW) should be able to bring them more in line. Yeah, the sensors behave differently, but I guarantee the detail is there in the Z images if you tweak your development settings to bring it out.

QuoteOriginally posted by bilbrown Quote
Seems like many people are saying that my "blacks are heavily crushed" like its a bad thing.

Why?

I can show you many photographers, particularly in street photography and fashion, that have the same sort of approach.


---------- Post added 02-29-16 at 09:18 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by skytomorrownow Quote
I don't think there is an aesthetic aversion to your choices, I think it was more about that you're trying to achieve a look like your Leica which doesn't have crushed blacks, while your 645Z shots do. I think the point is, that's a starting place. For example, the first image, if you look at the nose shadow, it's black. The Leica image that follows is also similarly contrasty, but the nose shadow isn't totally dark.

Personally, as an art director, I would choose your 645Z work over the Leica work. I think it expresses the look you are going for better than the Leica. It has the grunge and attitude that I would want for fashion (and is I assume why you like the front flash look), while remaining refined and elevated enough (due to the smooth tonality and resolution) to not be cheap or too punk rock (for high fashion).

The Leica shot looks like precision. The 645Z looks more like caviar.
What he said.
02-29-2016, 11:00 PM   #19
Site Supporter
gavincato's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 247
QuoteOriginally posted by bilbrown Quote
Seems like many people are saying that my "blacks are heavily crushed" like its a bad thing.

Why?

I can show you many photographers, particularly in street photography and fashion, that have the same sort of approach.
don't be so defensive. I never said anything about it being bad. goodness.

02-29-2016, 11:40 PM   #20
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 23
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gavincato Quote
don't be so defensive. I never said anything about it being bad. goodness.
It's all good really, I just noticed people kind of looking at the fact when a photographer pushes their blacks in a photo it is obviously to isolate the subject. Some people do it other ways of course (fast glass, bokeh, shallow DOF).

It just hasn't seemed to get a very positive response here. Just wondering why?

Not everyone is going to use/need the 15 stops of dynamic range. To be honest, I'm not sure if I need it but there are other benefits.



Seems like you use some of the sharper manual glass out there, that may give me some options to play with. I'm not opposed to stepping outside of my box I am just doing a specific thing here.

---------- Post added 03-01-16 at 12:43 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by skytomorrownow Quote
I don't think there is an aesthetic aversion to your choices, I think it was more about that you're trying to achieve a look like your Leica which doesn't have crushed blacks, while your 645Z shots do. I think the point is, that's a starting place. For example, the first image, if you look at the nose shadow, it's black. The Leica image that follows is also similarly contrasty, but the nose shadow isn't totally dark.

Personally, as an art director, I would choose your 645Z work over the Leica work. I think it expresses the look you are going for better than the Leica. It has the grunge and attitude that I would want for fashion (and is I assume why you like the front flash look), while remaining refined and elevated enough (due to the smooth tonality and resolution) to not be cheap or too punk rock (for high fashion).

The Leica shot looks like precision. The 645Z looks more like caviar.

I've been an art director myself, so I get what you are saying. Its funny, because I first noticed the difference with the medium format digital and BW with Hedi Slimane's work (I checked the EXIF, and he was of course using a Phase One in circumstances I would have used a more compact camera - go figure).



How about precision caviar
03-01-2016, 11:12 AM   #21
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 219
I would work on it in your post processing/profiling. Have you tried vsco presets? Also Mastin Labs Ilford pack has great profiles. The Nikon set works appropriately with Pentax for now. They will get you to a much better starting point for your B&Ws with one click. Seems like you want a P&S flashed look with good contrast. It's not your camera settings, it's your post processing.

Small variations in the contrast of individual lenses will not have as a dramatic an effect of what you're seeing. A Hasselblad lens will have a slightly different look but not a massive increase in SOOC contrast. Medium format digital is all about the file flexibility. You're meant to profile or work with profiles in LR.
03-01-2016, 11:21 AM   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,756
In my ignorance I will wade in. I think what you are missing is that no one is saying change the look of the shots. They are saying that if you want more nuanced blacks like the Leica seems to have - start by exposing differently and then batch process or manually process the files to a look closer to what you want. By exposing differently you will capture more detail - there is a tension obviously between highlights and shadows and I think they are of the opinion you have room for dropping your highlight headroom a bit to capture more details in the shadows - then when you crank it back to black you will have more nuance in the black than your have currently due to the 15 stops of dynamic range.

But I'm not shooting anything like this. So I'm just interpreting others.
03-01-2016, 12:58 PM   #23
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 160
Why not rent a 645D to see if that's the "look" you are after like the M8 or better yet the M9. Then again try renting the M246 to see how a B&W cam might work for you since you already have Leica M lenses.

03-01-2016, 01:24 PM   #24
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 23
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by algrove Quote
Why not rent a 645D to see if that's the "look" you are after like the M8 or better yet the M9. Then again try renting the M246 to see how a B&W cam might work for you since you already have Leica M lenses.
Yes, thought of that.

What I was really looking for was a bit more of the MF file structure. I could get a M246 of course, but that would exclude 50MP files and larger sensors (which is literally the main reason I wanted a MF option at all).

In a bit I will post some of the Leica S files when I tested an S over a year ago. This was a S 006 body and CCD.

They required less processing, and yes, I typically start with VSCO PRESETS and tweak, but after I get it basically right in camera.

The only reason I went with a CMOS body, and the Z, was I thought the sensor may be a tad more dynamic if I decide to change it up.

---------- Post added 03-01-16 at 02:27 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
In my ignorance I will wade in. I think what you are missing is that no one is saying change the look of the shots. They are saying that if you want more nuanced blacks like the Leica seems to have - start by exposing differently and then batch process or manually process the files to a look closer to what you want. By exposing differently you will capture more detail - there is a tension obviously between highlights and shadows and I think they are of the opinion you have room for dropping your highlight headroom a bit to capture more details in the shadows - then when you crank it back to black you will have more nuance in the black than your have currently due to the 15 stops of dynamic range.

But I'm not shooting anything like this. So I'm just interpreting others.

I get it. Makes sense. I I'll shoot something today and tweak.

I just remember the CCD of the S was pretty much on top of it out of the box. Maybe I am expecting too much from the very dynamic CMOS Of the Z.

But maybe in time I will dig it more, like with the M240.

I like both looks really. And he CMOS is much better for a lot of things that the CCD isn't.
03-01-2016, 02:23 PM   #25
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 23
Original Poster
Here are some files from the Leica S 006 when I tested it awhile back.

I post this to compare. not exactly the same point but there is something interesting about the files that i can't put my finger on.

Thoughts (compared to the Z)?
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
LEICA S (Typ 006)  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
LEICA S (Typ 006)  Photo 

Last edited by bilbrown; 03-01-2016 at 05:54 PM.
03-01-2016, 02:40 PM   #26
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 23
Original Poster
And one more from the Typ 006, the headshot is from about 30 feet away and a 200% crop.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
LEICA S (Typ 006)  Photo 

Last edited by bilbrown; 03-01-2016 at 05:55 PM.
03-01-2016, 04:00 PM   #27
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 23
Original Poster
I have found some interesting file structures with the Pentax 55 and the Sony sensor in the 645Z. Here is one.


This is hard!! One Leica Forum participant said of a similar thread there, "I had a small M 240 System but sold it in order to buy my S007 System. I would say that the two CMOS sensors behave very, very similar, only one has more resolution, obviously. So if you have worked with the M, you know what will be waiting for you. I personally would prefer the Sony Sensor on the Pentax because it is much more malleable. This is not to say the Leica sensor is bad, it is not.

On the other hand the Leica S lenses are wonderful and I can't see any competition from Pentax. For me this was decisive, the lenses.

Obviously there are so many Leica M lenses with special character that if you have some favorites there (say Noctilux or older Mandler designs), it is not so easy/impossible to find the same in the S line-up. But the S line up is a real family with similar characteristics. Technically perfect but also with - difficult to describe - character, very natural, some say almost film like. Not at all clinical as some have stated."


Anyone here have used both systems???
Attached Images
 
03-01-2016, 04:14 PM   #28
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 23
Original Poster
One last one. I may be getting the hang of it.

This one was slightly underexposed with the Z, did this in post in Photoshop (not lightroom)
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX 645Z  Photo 
03-02-2016, 08:21 AM - 1 Like   #29
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 219
Honestly man you're all over the place. You can reproduce the look from those Leica images you're posting but it doesn't sound like you want to do the work, sounds like you want the camera to do it for you.
03-02-2016, 02:25 PM   #30
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 23
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Sperdynamite Quote
Honestly man you're all over the place. You can reproduce the look from those Leica images you're posting but it doesn't sound like you want to do the work, sounds like you want the camera to do it for you.


I shoot both JPG with the BW set to -3 Exposure Comp, and RAW (DNG) to both cards (or one in cameras that only have one). MOST times I would like to use the JPGs if I can, as it makes the process FASTER for things that need FAST turn around. My process is VERY little post processing time. Usually 20-30 seconds on each image and shift+sync in LR the rest of the time. IF I really like an image I will open it in PS and take a little more time.

There is a reason I light the way I light it. Skin looks better for the type of imagery I want, and the high F-Stop keeps the blacks HARD and when its GREAT lighting EVERYTHING mostly in focus.


I leave retouching to retouchers, whether I can do it or not.



So yep, you are pretty much correct. You spend a few grand on a camera, and it would be nice to have usable files out of the box.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, 645z, 645z vs leica, camera, cameras, exposure, flash, glass, image, images, jpg, leica, leica s, light, look, m8, medium format, pentax 645z 51.4mp, people, post, sensor, series, shadows, solution, systems, third
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 645z unboxing and first look i83N Pentax Medium Format 2 07-01-2014 02:18 AM
Weekly Challenge Winners-Weekly Challenge #259 "Now that's a different look" charliezap Weekly Photo Challenges 9 10-05-2013 09:10 PM
Weekly Challenge Weekly Challenge #259."Now that's a different look" charliezap Weekly Photo Challenges 29 10-03-2013 08:29 AM
Getting That 1980's Fashion-Beauty Photography Blown Out Look benjikan Photographic Technique 9 06-27-2011 11:59 PM
That "Leica look" #2 FHPhotographer Photo Critique 8 09-06-2008 12:51 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:58 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top