Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-01-2017, 12:08 PM - 1 Like   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,272
QuoteOriginally posted by CreationBear Quote
I would definitely enjoy seeing your work.
Here are a few shots from when I had a viable photo business. Most are 67.
srasmuss | Flickr

05-01-2017, 12:26 PM - 1 Like   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,415
Outstanding--I'll have to study those shots closely (the fishhook cactus in particular are mesmerizing.) One thing that was surprising is just how often you seem to be cranked down to f32 or even f45...I might have been really underestimating what it takes to get "critical focus" through a frame when you're close to minimum focus distance.
05-01-2017, 12:48 PM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,272
Thanks; most of my macro and landscape work is at f/32, though I prefer f/16. That is just not possible in many cases. Using f/45 is generally too soft but I will use it if there is no other option. For macro work I use the 165LS unless I need f/45, then will use the 90-180 zoom. Both are proven.
05-01-2017, 04:06 PM   #19
Veteran Member
Silent Street's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Castlemaine, Victoria, AUS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,149
Busy in frameshop and @ lab today; will try to post a couple of pics when time.

05-02-2017, 07:12 AM   #20
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 120
Original Poster
Wow, so I guess I didn't consider just how stopped down landscape photographers like to go. I've only done a bit of it, even on digital. I would have thought that f/11 or f/14 would have been enough to get the DOF needed on an ultrawide lens. But it seems like you folks like to go all the way up to f/32 or 45! Doesn't defraction start to impact images that stopped down? Is this small of an aperture only needed for when the photographer wants an object in the foreground to be in focus? Will I be in trouble with my 55mm f/4 with a minimum aperture of f22?

Also thanks to Silent Street for the corrections and the suggestion to get a light meter. I don't really want to spend the money, but I'm starting to realize just how critical it is to doing film photography.

Thanks!
05-02-2017, 11:55 AM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pugetopolis
Posts: 11,008
After 30 years of shooting my 6x7/67 cameras, I've ended up with with a WLF (aka folding hood) for a view finder and using either the Sunny 16 rule or my Pentax one-degree spot meter. A simple, easier to carry around configuration and I get good results from it. In fact I get better results from the Sunny 16 rule when I'm outdoors than the TTL metered prism. And of course the one-degree beats any built in meter a 6x7/67/67II has.
05-02-2017, 12:46 PM   #22
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,272
QuoteOriginally posted by Femto1969 Quote
Wow, so I guess I didn't consider just how stopped down landscape photographers like to go. I've only done a bit of it, even on digital. I would have thought that f/11 or f/14 would have been enough to get the DOF needed on an ultrawide lens. But it seems like you folks like to go all the way up to f/32 or 45! Doesn't defraction start to impact images that stopped down? Is this small of an aperture only needed for when the photographer wants an object in the foreground to be in focus? Will I be in trouble with my 55mm f/4 with a minimum aperture of f22?
How far you stop down depends on your shooting style. I shoot my 45mm and 55-100 zoom at f/22 quite a bit and the diffraction is not a major concern. There are times when the composition demands more DOF and I simple have to comply and stop down... diffraction be damned. Yes, the smaller stops are essential for near/ far DOF shots.

05-11-2017, 09:40 AM - 1 Like   #23
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 8,083
I've got the 6x7 MLU, 67 & 67ii bodies with various lenses.

The one Pentax 6x7 purchase that really changed things for me was the purchase of my 67ii and AE metered prism. The interchangeable focusing screens, three metering modes, TTL flash and all the other features are real joy to use.

Phil.
05-11-2017, 04:45 PM   #24
Veteran Member
AquaDome's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: New Carlisle, IN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,475
I have a Rapid Omega 100 with 58/5.6, 90/3.5, and 180/4.5. When I got divorced, my wife got the Pentax 6x7.
05-19-2017, 01:28 PM   #25
Forum Member
jwatts's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Huntington Beach
Photos: Albums
Posts: 64
Body: Pentax 6x7 MLU
Got a good deal on it, had it fully serviced by Eric and Pentaxs and its been running solid since. If I was to buy again I’d get a “Pentax 67” for longevity reasons and would most likely be in better condition.

Viewfinder: First generation TTL
This came on my camera along with the WLF. I shoot landscape (a lot of vertical) so the WLF, while very cool to look at is very difficult to use. I don’t use the TTL functions of the TTL finder and would replace it with the non TTL version to save a little weight but I have yet to find one worth the price to switch.

Lenses:

SMC Pentax 45 f/4 (Newest Version)
Pros: Good sharpness. Decently low distortion for this focal length. It has half stops. good minimum focus distance.
Cons: Some people have gotten bad copies of this lens other than watching out for that potential issue, if your interested in this wide focal length its a must buy.

SMC Pentax 55 f/4 (Newest Version)
Pros: Sharp! I really have come to love this focal length. I shot a 45 for 2+ years as my wide and kept finding myself wanting to crop in about 10-15%. Got the 55, problem solved!
Cons: no half stops!! I shoot at f/16.5 extremely often! Most of my work is with C-neg film so the slight over exposure isn't the end of the world but I REALLY wish this lens had half stops beyond f/11.5.

Takumar 105 f/4 (old version)
Pros: Sharp! Wonderful focal length. I shoot this lens very often. If you shoot portraits this is a MUST lens, creamy beautiful bokeh.
Cons: These older versions have some variance in quality. I was lucky enough to get a good copy but I’d recommend buying a newer version.

SMC Pentax 200 f/4 (newest version)
Pros: Sharp. Good minimum focus distance. This lens can be had at very good prices. I use it a lot more than I originally thought I would.

Accessories:
#1-3 extension tubes

I use them for “macro abstraction” type images. There is nothing wrong with the tubes but the P67 is limited in DoF terms so using these and getting good focus is always a battle. If your shooting the 105 for portraiture a #1 or #2 tube would be a great way to punch in for some closer shots.
05-19-2017, 02:00 PM   #26
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2017
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 120
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jwatts Quote
SMC Pentax 200 f/4 (newest version)
Pros: Sharp. Good minimum focus distance. This lens can be had at very good prices. I use it a lot more than I originally thought I would.

Accessories:
#1-3 extension tubes

I use them for “macro abstraction” type images. There is nothing wrong with the tubes but the P67 is limited in DoF terms so using these and getting good focus is always a battle. If your shooting the 105 for portraiture a #1 or #2 tube would be a great way to punch in for some closer shots.
Thanks for that information!!

A few questions:

Do you use your 200mm for landscapes? Its minimum aperture is f/45 iirc. I'm hoping that I can use it for landscapes in Seattle of islands and mountains and such.

Can you explain the "punching in" aspect of the extension tubes on the 105?

And for those landscape shots with close focusing, where do you focus your lens to get everything sharp? Right on the near object? In the background? Somewhere in between? What aperture do you use?

Thanks!!
05-19-2017, 02:16 PM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pugetopolis
Posts: 11,008
Some additional info.

There are only two versions of the 45mm f4. The 6x7 and 67 generation. And there is no optical difference between the two. Only cosmetic housing differences. And there are three versions of the 105/2.4. The Super Tak, the 6x7 and 67 generation. There is also no optical difference between the 6x7 and 67 generations.

I've done portrait shots with the 105/2.4 and the #1 extension tube. Those shots are really tight just getting the head and some of the shoulders in is as far away as you can get. A #2 extension tube would be pretty much face only with the 105mm. You could get a full head but it would look decapitated without shoulders to provide a foundation for the head in the picture. That's "punching in" way too tight for me.
05-19-2017, 05:37 PM   #28
Veteran Member
Silent Street's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Castlemaine, Victoria, AUS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,149
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
You could get a full head but it would look decapitated without shoulders to provide a foundation for the head in the picture.
<*giggle*> You have a way with words...
05-19-2017, 08:35 PM   #29
Forum Member
jwatts's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Huntington Beach
Photos: Albums
Posts: 64
QuoteOriginally posted by Femto1969 Quote
Thanks for that information!!

A few questions:

Do you use your 200mm for landscapes? Its minimum aperture is f/45 iirc. I'm hoping that I can use it for landscapes in Seattle of islands and mountains and such.

Can you explain the "punching in" aspect of the extension tubes on the 105?

And for those landscape shots with close focusing, where do you focus your lens to get everything sharp? Right on the near object? In the background? Somewhere in between? What aperture do you use?

Thanks!!
I only shoot landscape and use my 200 much more than I thought I would. I am a little more interested in simplifying rather than "showing it all" so depending on your shooting style it might not be as much use to some. Below are 4 different examples of situations in which I used a 200mm.



This is a close up of a section of rocks of rocks about 30x40 inches if I remember correctly. I might have been able to get closer with a shorter lens but I wanted the flattening or compressing effect of a longer focal length. You can see I lost focus in the top as the rocks were positioned farther away from me in the top of the frame and closer in the foreground.


Here is a medium shot. The pool of water in this image is about 15x30 feet. I wanted to single out this water feature within the negative space of snow from its surroundings of a busy forrest. I stood slightly above the water feature to try and shoot straight across at it, Im probably standing 40 ish feet back from the nearest creek edge.


Here is a "near/far" type medium wide image. As you can see there are 2 foreground branches at the top of the frame that are soft due to them being infront of my foreground focus point (the rocks at the bottom of the frame). If I was to shoot this again I'd sacrifice background sharpness vs foreground since the slightly out of focus far background would read as mist anyway. Live and you learn.


Here is a wide image. I have shot a decent amount of wide images with the 200mm knowing im going to crop into 6x12. I know exactly where I was standing for this image and just google earth'ed it and its almost 6mi to the half lit half dark hill in the mid ground.

I shoot using hyper-focal technique, so I'm focusing on the nearest object I want in focus. For example in the 3rd image, I focused on the rocks in the foreground check the DoF scale on my lens and the infinity sign was around f22 telling me that everything from my near focus to infinity would be sharp if I shot at f22. As mentioned above about the branches, you can at times err slightly on the side of losing focus at infinity since far distances in some situations will not be super sharp due to atmosphere or in that images case fog/mist. I shoot 90% of my images at f16/16.5 on the other lenses or F/22 on the 200.

Also to clarify, sorry, by punching in I just was referring to getting closer. The extension rings give you the ability to focus the lens nearer to the subject. I can agree with what was said about it possibly being to close for traditional portraiture but depending on your style/what you are doing it can be a great buy. I've seen a decent amount of people wishing the 105 focused a bit closer so I threw in that statement as its something I have seen people shooting both landscape and portraiture express interest in.
05-20-2017, 11:27 AM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,272
QuoteOriginally posted by Femto1969 Quote
And for those landscape shots with close focusing, where do you focus your lens to get everything sharp? Right on the near object? In the background? Somewhere in between? What aperture do you use?
The simple answer is to use the DOF scale on the lens. But beware, these scales are not conservative so a bit of adjustment is needed. If for example you have the lens set at f/32 and you set the depth using the DOF scale, there is likely to be a bit of softness near and far. It is best to back up slightly from the close focus indicated on your scale and move your infinity mark to f/22. Each lens varies on how much you need to shift the infinity mark away from the indicated DOF scale marks. The 45mm needs a small adjustment, the 300 Takumar needs a lot. The 200 Pentax needs a small adjustment. In other words the DOF scales vary in accuracy.
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, accessories, camera, cons, gum, leaf, lens, lenses, medium format, mlu, mode, pentax, people, portraits, post, pros, shutter, viewfinder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
24-70mm DFA - how will it integrate into your lineup? Conqueror Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 45 12-24-2015 09:36 PM
Night Why Why Why eccentricphotography Pentax K-3 Photo Contest 3 06-02-2014 09:36 AM
For Sale - Sold: SWAP: Your 67 45/55mm for my 67 200mm rob1234 Sold Items 3 04-10-2013 11:55 AM
Burning of the Koran ... ! Why? Why? Why? jpzk General Talk 128 09-14-2010 04:45 PM
Post your ideal prime lineup! JohnBee Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 64 01-27-2010 12:48 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:23 AM. | 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