Post your medium format photos!

Jonathan Mac · 11-21-2012, 03:25 PM

Hedges make the worst bokeh, even worse than branches or general foliage.

**jt_cph_dk** · 11-21-2012, 03:38 PM - **1 Like**

P6X7, SMC 67 4.5/75, Portra 400NC, Epson V750

rob1234 · 11-22-2012, 01:47 AM

Originally posted by tuco

Didn't line up the arrow on the paper backing with the indicator on the camera while loading? Or maybe you accidentally snapped the first frame with the lens cap on?

What do you think of the bokeh? it looks like a little on the nervous side to me. The optics on the 105mm is reportedly unchanged from the first Takumar generation to the SMC P67 generation, I hear.

Definitely lined the start arrow up correctly, but guess I may have snapped the first frame by accident. No biggy, we'll see what the second roll looks like.

Bokeh seems OK usually (although this is my first ever 9 frames with the 67 and that lens!), but agree the hedge above isn't doing it any favours. The DOF and ability to separate objects is the main reason I picked up 67 though!

Also have discovered there's not much room for error in the shadows, at least not with Superia 400 and my Epson 4870. Am metering the next roll as ISO 320, see if that's any better.

**jt_cph_dk** · 11-22-2012, 03:06 AM

Originally posted by rob1234

Also have discovered there's not much room for error in the shadows, at least not with Superia 400 and my Epson 4870

Hello Rob, congratulations with the new gear. Digital noise in the shadows will be a problem with any scanner. I rented an Imacon last year and it did not produce less noise (than my Epson V750). It seems, that one has to avoid deep/black shadows or live with the noise. Perhaps you should use slide film. Then you have to get the lighting right in the first place. And then, there will be no issues with getting the correct colors in scanning later. Regards

**jt_cph_dk** · 11-22-2012, 03:24 AM - **1 Like**

Here is an article adressing the problem with the noise in the shadows in scanned images:

»Per channel scan performance and noise
One aspect I didn't explore in the first public release of this test is the per-channel scan performance. Now with the new scans available of the overhauled Imacon 848, I did take an even closer look at the scans and discovered something new I hadn't be aware of before. The images below are crops of the full 8000 ppi resolution scans. No sharpening has been applied. Each series of 4 pictures per film type represent a crop of the original scans, and separated by color channel (Red, Green, Blue)

RGB/RED/GREEN/BLUE channels

Especially noteworthy is the unexpected bad scan result in the blue channel of this scan, that is also visible in the Kodak Portra 160 VC scan series below, but not in the Fuji Velvia scan. The blue channel, disregarding the overal darker appearance (caused by the simple fact that we are looking a crop of skin tone, and skin does not have much "blue", hence low values in the blue channel which are rendered dark by Photoshop), clearly has a much more "grainy" and "patchy" look than the other two color channels.«

Read on..
Technique - Kodak Ektar 100 test - Per channel scan performance and noise

Regards

**jt_cph_dk** · 11-22-2012, 03:59 AM

Crabapples in Blossom. P67II at 1:45sec (handheld, no MLU), SMC 67 4/55 at 8, Ektar 100 (pro lab), Epson V750, SilverFast 6.6ai using ‘Automatic‘, USM: 70%, 1.7, 5X5, ‘Landscape‘ and NegaFix set at Kodak Gold 100 (since there is no Ektar set), 3200ppi. I had to correct some CA in the corners/edge, where the lens has problems with the highlight/contrast edges in PS4. That and a crop is all the PP done.

rob1234 · 11-22-2012, 11:53 AM

Thanks for all the comments and advice.

More of my bike captured by the 67/105 combo:

P67, Takumar 105/2.4, Fuji Superia 400, Epson 4870

**jt_cph_dk** · 11-22-2012, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by rob1234

Thanks for all the comments and advice.

More of my bike captured by the 67/105 combo:

P67, Takumar 105/2.4, Fuji Superia 400, Epson 4870

Great shot! Full of fine lines (it feels like you could look into the details forever). Some of those leaves, so skinny, are what detail is all about!

Regards

rob1234 · 11-22-2012, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by jt_cph_dk

Great shot! Full of fine lines (it feels like you could look into the details forever). Some of those leaves, so skinny, are what detail is all about!

Regards

Many thanks indeed - however, if you blow it up I missed the focus slightly

**jt_cph_dk** · 11-22-2012, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by rob1234

Many thanks indeed - however, if you blow it up I missed the focus slightly

..well, isn´t 67 just a forgiving format

You can fill up most of my screen with a photo and never even show me that it´s not in focus! Amazing that is..

**Rense** · 11-25-2012, 08:57 AM - **1 Like**

rob1234 · 11-25-2012, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by Rense

Lovely shot. 55mm?

**Rense** · 11-25-2012, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by rob1234

Lovely shot. 55mm?

Thank you, Rob! I am not absolutely sure, either 55 or 45 mm. Brought both..... And it's too long ago....

**jt_cph_dk** · 11-25-2012, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by Rense

Great shot Rense. Lofoten and the north of Norway is one of my must-go-to places. Your photo reminds me of why! Regards

**Rense** · 11-25-2012, 11:03 AM

Originally posted by jt_cph_dk

Great shot Rense. Lofoten and the north of Norway is one of my must-go-to places. Your photo reminds me of why! Regards

Thanks! The Lofoten are just wonderful!!

11-22-2012, 03:24 AM - 1 Like	#3680
jt_cph_dk Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 510	Here is an article adressing the problem with the noise in the shadows in scanned images: »Per channel scan performance and noise One aspect I didn't explore in the first public release of this test is the per-channel scan performance. Now with the new scans available of the overhauled Imacon 848, I did take an even closer look at the scans and discovered something new I hadn't be aware of before. The images below are crops of the full 8000 ppi resolution scans. No sharpening has been applied. Each series of 4 pictures per film type represent a crop of the original scans, and separated by color channel (Red, Green, Blue) RGB/RED/GREEN/BLUE channels Especially noteworthy is the unexpected bad scan result in the blue channel of this scan, that is also visible in the Kodak Portra 160 VC scan series below, but not in the Fuji Velvia scan. The blue channel, disregarding the overal darker appearance (caused by the simple fact that we are looking a crop of skin tone, and skin does not have much "blue", hence low values in the blue channel which are rendered dark by Photoshop), clearly has a much more "grainy" and "patchy" look than the other two color channels.« Read on.. Technique - Kodak Ektar 100 test - Per channel scan performance and noise Regards Last edited by jt_cph_dk; 11-22-2012 at 03:31 AM. Reason: added images and text

11-22-2012, 03:59 AM	#3681
jt_cph_dk Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 510	Crabapples in Blossom. P67II at 1:45sec (handheld, no MLU), SMC 67 4/55 at 8, Ektar 100 (pro lab), Epson V750, SilverFast 6.6ai using ‘Automatic‘, USM: 70%, 1.7, 5X5, ‘Landscape‘ and NegaFix set at Kodak Gold 100 (since there is no Ektar set), 3200ppi. I had to correct some CA in the corners/edge, where the lens has problems with the highlight/contrast edges in PS4. That and a crop is all the PP done. Last edited by jt_cph_dk; 11-22-2012 at 04:42 AM. Reason: text edit

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
First Medium Format	straightshooter	Pentax Medium Format	7	12-02-2019 10:11 PM
Medium format...	D4rknezz	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	9	04-06-2010 03:59 PM
Medium Format Soon?	k100d	Pentax News and Rumors	0	03-04-2009 12:09 PM
Medium Format	Buffy	Pentax Medium Format	5	03-19-2008 12:04 AM

11-21-2012, 03:25 PM	#3676
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,897	Hedges make the worst bokeh, even worse than branches or general foliage.

11-21-2012, 03:38 PM - 1 Like	#3677
jt_cph_dk Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 510	P6X7, SMC 67 4.5/75, Portra 400NC, Epson V750

11-22-2012, 01:47 AM	#3678
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	Originally posted by tuco Didn't line up the arrow on the paper backing with the indicator on the camera while loading? Or maybe you accidentally snapped the first frame with the lens cap on? What do you think of the bokeh? it looks like a little on the nervous side to me. The optics on the 105mm is reportedly unchanged from the first Takumar generation to the SMC P67 generation, I hear. Definitely lined the start arrow up correctly, but guess I may have snapped the first frame by accident. No biggy, we'll see what the second roll looks like. Bokeh seems OK usually (although this is my first ever 9 frames with the 67 and that lens!), but agree the hedge above isn't doing it any favours. The DOF and ability to separate objects is the main reason I picked up 67 though! Also have discovered there's not much room for error in the shadows, at least not with Superia 400 and my Epson 4870. Am metering the next roll as ISO 320, see if that's any better.

11-22-2012, 03:06 AM	#3679
jt_cph_dk Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 510	Originally posted by rob1234 Also have discovered there's not much room for error in the shadows, at least not with Superia 400 and my Epson 4870 Hello Rob, congratulations with the new gear. Digital noise in the shadows will be a problem with any scanner. I rented an Imacon last year and it did not produce less noise (than my Epson V750). It seems, that one has to avoid deep/black shadows or live with the noise. Perhaps you should use slide film. Then you have to get the lighting right in the first place. And then, there will be no issues with getting the correct colors in scanning later. Regards

11-22-2012, 11:53 AM	#3682
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	Thanks for all the comments and advice. More of my bike captured by the 67/105 combo: P67, Takumar 105/2.4, Fuji Superia 400, Epson 4870

11-22-2012, 12:53 PM	#3683
jt_cph_dk Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 510	Originally posted by rob1234 Thanks for all the comments and advice. More of my bike captured by the 67/105 combo: P67, Takumar 105/2.4, Fuji Superia 400, Epson 4870 Great shot! Full of fine lines (it feels like you could look into the details forever). Some of those leaves, so skinny, are what detail is all about! Regards

11-22-2012, 03:04 PM	#3684
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	Originally posted by jt_cph_dk Great shot! Full of fine lines (it feels like you could look into the details forever). Some of those leaves, so skinny, are what detail is all about! Regards Many thanks indeed - however, if you blow it up I missed the focus slightly

11-22-2012, 04:05 PM	#3685
jt_cph_dk Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 510	Originally posted by rob1234 Many thanks indeed - however, if you blow it up I missed the focus slightly ..well, isn´t 67 just a forgiving format You can fill up most of my screen with a photo and never even show me that it´s not in focus! Amazing that is..

11-25-2012, 08:57 AM - 1 Like	#3686
Rense Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Zetten - The Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,050

11-25-2012, 10:11 AM	#3687
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	Originally posted by Rense Lovely shot. 55mm?

11-25-2012, 10:28 AM	#3688
Rense Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Zetten - The Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,050	Originally posted by rob1234 Lovely shot. 55mm? Thank you, Rob! I am not absolutely sure, either 55 or 45 mm. Brought both..... And it's too long ago....

11-25-2012, 10:50 AM	#3689
jt_cph_dk Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 510	Originally posted by Rense Great shot Rense. Lofoten and the north of Norway is one of my must-go-to places. Your photo reminds me of why! Regards

11-25-2012, 11:03 AM	#3690
Rense Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Zetten - The Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,050	Originally posted by jt_cph_dk Great shot Rense. Lofoten and the north of Norway is one of my must-go-to places. Your photo reminds me of why! Regards Thanks! The Lofoten are just wonderful!!