[tuco]

From the latest test roll with the borrowed 645N. The last two were hand-held at 1/60s and 1/125s respectively. I am really impressed with how easy it is to hand-hold this camera.

Water To Rock

Fremont Bridge And Sky, v1


Fremont Bridge And Sky, v2

All using Fuji Neopan Acros 100 processed in Edwal FG-7 (1+15), 10' @ 21C with gentile agitation (30s initial, 3 inversions every 30s thereafter). Scanned on the Epson V700 at 1200 dpi and minimal PP.


Steve

Good deal. Are you going to be sad to see it go?

[tuco]

On the subject of test shots, the first frame from the first roll of some new gear. This camera is a rangefinder and it is really light. Even the lenses are all half the size and weight of my Hassy and Pentax 6x7. It's a handhold marvel. It has built-in metering and even aperture priority. But with a really wide 43mm lens, the meter acts like a spot meter because it is a fixed area in the rangefinder window. So until I get use to that, It's just as easy to use my one-degree spot meter.

Mamiya 7II, N 43mm f4.5 L, Yellow Filter, Kodak 400TMY, PMK Pyro, Pentax Digital Spotmeter

[Bogie]

From the latest test roll with the borrowed 645N. The last two were hand-held at 1/60s and 1/125s respectively. I am really impressed with how easy it is to hand-hold this camera.

Water To Rock


Pentax 645N, Pentax-A 645 75/2.8


Fremont Bridge And Sky, v1


Pentax 645N, Pentax-FA 645 45/2.8, Wratten #25A (red)


Fremont Bridge And Sky, v2


Pentax 645N, Pentax-FA 645 45/2.8, Wratten #25A (red)


All using Fuji Neopan Acros 100 processed in Edwal FG-7 (1+15), 10' @ 21C with gentile agitation (30s initial, 3 inversions every 30s thereafter). Scanned on the Epson V700 at 1200 dpi and minimal PP.


Steve

Good tones in all - I really like the perspective of the 2nd shot

[lbenac]

Interesting. 2kg for the Chamonix? kit
Steve

Steve,

This includes the folding viewer and a protecting case that I take the Chamonix in.

Same for the lenses they are included in a protecting case:
1) Nikkor-SW 90/8, Nikkor -W 180/5.6 (Plamat), Nikkor-M 300/9 (Tessar) in case = 1.5Kg
2) Nikkor-SW 75/4.5, Fujica 125/5.6, Caltar-N 210/5.6 (Plasmat), Nikkor-M 300/9 = 1.5 Kg
3)Caltar-N 115/6.8, Caltar-N 210/5.6 = 1.3 Kg

So I am tiding-up the line-up and I am replacing replacing the 180 and 210 by a small Tessar 210/6.8 Xenar that I just got on eBay.

I will let go of the Caltar-N 115/6.8 and Caltar-N 210/5.6. These are a great set but really more of a 5x7 set. I doubt that I will add a 5x7 to the 4x5 in any foreseeable future.

Cheers,

Luc

---

Last edited by lbenac; 07-23-2011 at 08:13 AM.

[lbenac]

From the latest test roll with the borrowed 645N. The last two were hand-held at 1/60s and 1/125s respectively. I am really impressed with how easy it is to hand-hold this camera.

Water To Rock


Pentax 645N, Pentax-A 645 75/2.8


Fremont Bridge And Sky, v1


Pentax 645N, Pentax-FA 645 45/2.8, Wratten #25A (red)


Fremont Bridge And Sky, v2


Pentax 645N, Pentax-FA 645 45/2.8, Wratten #25A (red)


All using Fuji Neopan Acros 100 processed in Edwal FG-7 (1+15), 10' @ 21C with gentile agitation (30s initial, 3 inversions every 30s thereafter). Scanned on the Epson V700 at 1200 dpi and minimal PP.


Steve

As I said the 645 feels like a 35mm on steroid and gives great results (as your are showing) compared to a 35mm. If weight is not an issue, I still prefer the 67.

Cheers,

Luc

[stevebrot]

Good deal. Are you going to be sad to see it go?

Perhaps. The build and feel of the camera are quite addictive. The whole exposure mechanism is soooo smooth, it is hard to image that there is a good size mirror moving around in there. The ease of use aspect is also right up there. The AF is VERY fast and quiet and the metering is top notch. I was actually using it for snapshots yesterday evening over dinner with friends at an outdoor floating cafe in Portland.


Steve

[stevebrot]

On the subject of test shots, the first frame from the first roll of some new gear. This camera is a rangefinder and it is really light. Even the lenses are all half the size and weight of my Hassy and Pentax 6x7. It's a handhold marvel. It has built-in metering and even aperture priority. But with a really wide 43mm lens, the meter acts like a spot meter because it is a fixed area in the rangefinder window. So until I get use to that, It's just as easy to use my one-degree spot meter.

Mamiya 7II, N 43mm f4.5 L, Yellow Filter, Kodak 400TMY, PMK Pyro, Pentax Digital Spotmeter

Cool! Congratulations on the new toy!

I have been very interested in the idea of a MF rangefinder or even an old folder (I have an online friend who shoots and gets excellent results with a Weltur). The idea of a lightweight, relatively compact, hand-holdable camera MF camera is very alluring for all kinds of shooting. The Mamiya 6 or 7 would be high on the list except for price...Ouch!!!


Steve

[stevebrot]

Steve,

This includes the folding viewer and a protecting case that I take the Chamonix in.

Same for the lenses they are included in a protecting case:
1) Nikkor-SW 90/8, Nikkor -W 180/5.6 (Plamat), Nikkor-M 300/9 (Tessar) in case = 1.5Kg
2) Nikkor-SW 75/4.5, Fujica 125/5.6, Caltar-N 210/5.6 (Plasmat), Nikkor-M 300/9 = 1.5 Kg
3)Caltar-N 115/6.8, Caltar-N 210/5.6 = 1.3 Kg

So I am tiding-up the line-up and I am replacing replacing the 180 and 210 by a small Tessar 210/6.8 Xenar that I just got on eBay.

I will let go of the Caltar-N 115/6.8 and Caltar-N 210/5.6. These are a great set but really more of a 5x7 set. I doubt that I will add a 5x7 to the 4x5 in any foreseeable future.

Cheers,

Luc

Sounds like a winnowing in the lens department is in order. I will be interested in your results and experience with the Xenar. It is truly a tiny lens and a true featherweight (46g ?). Coverage is a little on the modest side (about the same as my Caltar 150), but the tradeoff in size/weight with larger coverage lenses is significant. My Nikkor W 210/5.6 weighs 460g and requires a Copal 1 shutter!


Steve

[Yamanobori]

Thanks for this, I've tried to bump up the levels in curves a bit more but want to keep a little detail in Big Ben as this adds context to the shot for me, so mine is now close to yours, but still retaining a little detail in Big Ben. Also in the original shot, the van isn't white, it's cream and blue which might have complicated the B&W conversion a little. I'm still pretty new to the post processing side of things although I've always enjoyed taking photos...

Much better. You are really enjoying the 33–55 zoom. It seems to be panned by others. It is really difficult to get the lowdown on the Pentax lenses.

[tuco]

Cool! Congratulations on the new toy!

I have been very interested in the idea of a MF rangefinder or even an old folder (I have an online friend who shoots and gets excellent results with a Weltur). The idea of a lightweight, relatively compact, hand-holdable camera MF camera is very alluring for all kinds of shooting. The Mamiya 6 or 7 would be high on the list except for price...Ouch!!!


Steve

Yes, the price of the M7ii is high for a film camera that nobody wants to shoot anymore. And the camera definitely has two check lists; one of advantages and one of quirks/disadvantages. It's famous wide angle lenses still command a high price, comparatively small selection of lenses made for it and no fast lens in its lineup. But it will become my hiking and backpacking camera of choice for film I believe.

[lbenac]

Yes, the price of the M7ii is high for a film camera that nobody wants to shoot anymore. And the camera definitely has two check lists; one of advantages and one of quirks/disadvantages. It's famous wide angle lenses still command a high price, comparatively small selection of lenses made for it and no fast lens in its lineup. But it will become my hiking and backpacking camera of choice for film I believe.

Thanks Tuco, I now feel a lot better after all my purchases to see that you have been doing some serious buying of your own in a short period of time
Let us know what you think of the M7 - specially if you get the 65mm and some of the very few other lenses. The 43mm is a yearly budget on its own
I heard that in some cases the RF was knocked out of alignment very easily.

Cheers,

Luc

[lbenac]

Sounds like a winnowing in the lens department is in order. I will be interested in your results and experience with the Xenar. It is truly a tiny lens and a true featherweight (46g ?). Coverage is a little on the modest side (about the same as my Caltar 150), but the tradeoff in size/weight with larger coverage lenses is significant. My Nikkor W 210/5.6 weighs 460g and requires a Copal 2 shutter!


Steve

Not that feather weight and with good coverage.
See the opinion of Chris Perez.

Six Lens Matchup - a big test

It's copal 1 for which I have a spare lens board and I got mine (mint) for $200 versus a Nikkor-M around the $500. I really like the Tessar formula as in my Nikkor-M 300/9 so it should be nice.

Cheers,

Luc

[tuco]

Thanks Tuco, I now feel a lot better after all my purchases to see that you have been doing some serious buying of your own in a short period of time
Let us know what you think of the M7 - specially if you get the 65mm and some of the very few other lenses. The 43mm is a yearly budget on its own
I heard that in some cases the RF was knocked out of alignment very easily.

Cheers,

Luc

Thanks for that bit about the RF. I'll take extra care of it. Built like a tank this camera is not. That's one of the tradeoffs. Here is a data point. The M7II with either the 43/65/80mm lens on it weighs less than a K-5 with a DA* 16-50mm f2.8 on it.

[stevebrot]

Not that feather weight and with good coverage.

Ha! Ha! I misread the table on LFphoto The weight is a more appropriate 375g which is still respectably light though not as petite as my Caltar 150

[itshimitis]

Much better. You are really enjoying the 33–55 zoom. It seems to be panned by others. It is really difficult to get the lowdown on the Pentax lenses.

I did have a FA35 but part exchanged it for the FA 33-55 and an A 80-160, and an A 75. I think I got stung a bit on it, but you live and learn. I find it mostly pretty sharp, particularly when the light is good. Part of me still hankers after the FA35, so I have a little bit of buyer's/seller's regret. I like the flexibility that having a zoom gives me, and it usually gives pretty good results. I do wish however that I had kept the 35, because my instinct tells me it was better. Mind you I got it in the neck from the wife for buying the camera, even though it was quite a bit cheaper than in the UK in Japan.

Am really enjoying using the 645d though. I love the feel of it in my hand, and it's actually about the same weight of my Canon 5D mkII with a 24-70 L lens on it.

Thanks guys for the assistance, I now know that the first fish and chip shot was way too dark, and I didn't need Big Ben to be correctly exposed for it to have a hint of it to put it into context.