Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-03-2014, 12:09 AM   #5086
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,725
QuoteOriginally posted by vjacesslav Quote
Here is my first shot taken with Asahi Pentax 67 with 105mm 2.4... Film is FOMAPAN 400 developed in Fomadon P...
Great job on hitting the focus.

QuoteOriginally posted by itshimitis Quote
i could be wrong, but is that Burghley house? the trees look familiar to me as well as the house...
Nope - it's Kingston Lacy - Kingston Lacy - Visitor information - National Trust

04-03-2014, 01:38 AM   #5087
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SLovakia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 140
QuoteOriginally posted by vjacesslav Quote
Here is my first shot taken with Asahi Pentax 67 with 105mm 2.4... Film is FOMAPAN 400 developed in Fomadon P...
krasne foto, Vjacesslav, gratulujem k 6x7!
04-03-2014, 04:23 AM   #5088
Site Supporter
vjacesslav's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Košice, Czechoslovakia, Europe Union
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 366
QuoteOriginally posted by therion Quote
krasne foto, Vjacesslav, gratulujem k 6x7!
Thank You, we will write something about it on Pentaxfriends forum too For now I will only shoot black and white to get more skills, but the 3D effect and definition of space on photos, i cannot find anything similar these days That is one of the reason to get one. Find similarities and compare it with Film FF, and Digital APS-C
04-03-2014, 05:49 AM   #5089
Pentaxian
unixrevolution's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Waldorf, MD
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,855
QuoteOriginally posted by rob1234 Quote
Pentax 67ii
45/4
1/250th @ f/16
Portra 400NC
Med-res lab scan

---------- Post added 2014-04-02 at 21:26 ----------



35mm f/0.8 apparently - this site is your friend!

Depth of Field, Angle and Field of View, and Equivalent Lens Calculator - Points in Focus Photography
Ignoring of course that the "equivalent" depth of field between two lenses on different format changes at every single working distance. The idea of "Focal length equivalence" or "Depth of field equivalence" is a fallacy. Different focal lengths hit infinity at different points, and a 300mm f/5.6 on an 8x10 will keep giving you shallow depth of field after a 35mm on APS-C has long since been at infinity. However, for a given working distance, they can be compared, but it's still not equivalence.

Field-of-view equivalence is okay, except that with e.g. 8x10 and 35mm, or 6x7 and 35mm, it gets nebulous. Are we comparing diagonal view angle? Horizontal? Vertical? All three give a different "crop factor" (Don't get me started on why "Crop factor" is wrong, and why hearing "crop-sensor camera" makes me see red.) It will depend on what you mean, since the aspect ratios are different.

But, now that my nerd rant is over...as an 8x10, 4x5 and 6x7 fan, I can tell you that even the So-called "Slow" lenses of larger formats give shallow depth of field like crazy when you run them wide open. I took a head-and-shoulders portrait on my 8x10 and had to use F/22 AND front swing just to get the subject sharp. The background was still creamy.

04-03-2014, 07:34 AM   #5090
Pentaxian
mikeSF's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,625
QuoteOriginally posted by therion Quote
Pentax 67 + Takumar 105/2.4 at f2.4, , Fomapan 100 film, at Ilfotec LC-29, scanner Nikon 8000ED:



bokeh and atmosphere of this picture is outstanding, what keeps me using 6x7 film

what would be eq. lens on APS-C?

something about 50/ 1.0 ?
that is pretty!
04-03-2014, 07:49 AM   #5091
Site Supporter
vjacesslav's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Košice, Czechoslovakia, Europe Union
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 366
QuoteOriginally posted by therion Quote
Pentax 67 + Takumar 105/2.4 at f2.4, , Fomapan 100 film, at Ilfotec LC-29, scanner Nikon 8000ED:

bokeh and atmosphere of this picture is outstanding, what keeps me using 6x7 film

what would be eq. lens on APS-C?

something about 50/ 1.0 ?
Another Amazing shot from You... I cas say only "WAUUUU"
04-03-2014, 10:06 AM - 2 Likes   #5092
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,921

Valley View Road par Daiku San, on ipernity
Zenza Bronica EC
Zenzanon MC 80/2.4
Kodak Ektar 100
04-03-2014, 12:38 PM   #5093
Pentaxian
mikeSF's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,625
nice one, Colton. great leading of the eye into the scene.

04-03-2014, 12:41 PM   #5094
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,725
Another from the same roll:


Pentax 67ii
45/4
1/60th @ f/8
Portra 400NC
Med-res lab scan
04-03-2014, 01:54 PM   #5095
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,921
QuoteOriginally posted by mikeSF Quote
nice one, Colton. great leading of the eye into the scene.
Thanks Mike.
04-03-2014, 06:10 PM   #5096
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Scio, OR
Posts: 106
Pentax 67, Fp-4, WD2D+





Bronica SQAM, 6x4.5, Hp-5, WD2D+


04-05-2014, 07:13 AM - 2 Likes   #5097
Forum Member
Jan67's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 84
QuoteOriginally posted by unixrevolution Quote
Ignoring of course that the "equivalent" depth of field between two lenses on different format changes at every single working distance. The idea of "Focal length equivalence" or "Depth of field equivalence" is a fallacy. Different focal lengths hit infinity at different points, and a 300mm f/5.6 on an 8x10 will keep giving you shallow depth of field after a 35mm on APS-C has long since been at infinity. However, for a given working distance, they can be compared, but it's still not equivalence.
Field-of-view equivalence is okay, except that with e.g. 8x10 and 35mm, or 6x7 and 35mm, it gets nebulous. Are we comparing diagonal view angle? Horizontal? Vertical? All three give a different "crop factor" (Don't get me started on why "Crop factor" is wrong, and why hearing "crop-sensor camera" makes me see red.) It will depend on what you mean, since the aspect ratios are different.
Although I have to agree, that comparing formats with different ratios, like 6x7 and 35mm, is not exact (I use diagonals in this case), it's still interesting to have rough comparison of equivalence. Working distance must be identical because of the same perspective. And then is equivalence, if correctly applied on focal lenght, aperture and ISO, valid.

But back to pictures, here are two from Venedig carnival.
Pentax 6x7, Tri-X 400/ID11, 105/2.4, scanned by K3+M50/4makro+32mm ring, stitched together in PS
Attached Images
   
04-05-2014, 10:08 PM   #5098
Pentaxian
unixrevolution's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Waldorf, MD
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,855
QuoteOriginally posted by Jan67 Quote
Although I have to agree, that comparing formats with different ratios, like 6x7 and 35mm, is not exact (I use diagonals in this case), it's still interesting to have rough comparison of equivalence. Working distance must be identical because of the same perspective. And then is equivalence, if correctly applied on focal lenght, aperture and ISO, valid.

But back to pictures, here are two from Venedig carnival.
Pentax 6x7, Tri-X 400/ID11, 105/2.4, scanned by K3+M50/4makro+32mm ring, stitched together in PS
Beautiful captures! I'd liketo know about your scanning rig.

And thank you for replying to my post. The problem itself doesn't lie with the comparison made between two formats at the same working distance. Iv'e tried, myself, to come up with clearer wording or a better way to explain what the equivalence or effect is between two lenses like this, and the focal length and aperture equivalence is just the best shorthand. However, the problem as I see it is that to many new photographers look ata the short-hand and misinterpret it. For instance, thinking the focal length of a lens actually changes depending on format, or (as I thought initially) that the lens would behave as its stated equivalent at all distances. This is of course, not the case. (I had a friend, a very knowledgeable photographer, who thought when I stuck 35mm in my Yashica 635 with an 80/3.5 that it wouldn't act like an 80/3.5, because he was confused on the ideas of crop factor and 35mm equivalence.)

I try in everything I do to prevent from spreading misinformation or misconceptions, and I find many of the misconceptions around "focal length equivalence" to be widespread. I'm trying to find a clearer way to state the information that we want to know without contributing to the spread of this confusion. Unfortnately, photographers don't think intuitively in angle-of-view and depth-of-field because those numbers rarely enter our heads directly when using cameras. So, to that end, I feel justified in saying, "FIeld-of-view equivalence' instead of "focal length equivalence", and putting the footnote anytime I mention an equivalent depht of field that it's only at that one workign distance. I think these clarifications help, rather than hinder, the hobby....wether my nerd rants do the same, that remains to be seen.

Thanks again for replying, and posting pictures!
04-07-2014, 01:32 PM - 2 Likes   #5099
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Kansas City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 572
Pentax 67 | Pentax 75 2.8 AL | Portra 400 pushed to 1600 in development
04-07-2014, 09:36 PM   #5100
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,196
QuoteOriginally posted by montman Quote
Pentax 67 | Pentax 75 2.8 AL | Portra 400 pushed to 1600 in development
Very nice!

Phil.
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, camera, cameras, cheapo, drive, efex, film, flickr, format, frame, fujifilm, holes, lens, lomo, medium, medium format, p67ii, pentax 67, portra, post, road, roll, scanner, shot, shots, silver, software, strait, takumar 90mm
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First Medium Format straightshooter Pentax Medium Format 3 08-24-2010 07:10 AM
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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:03 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