[texandrews]

Thank you to everyone who offered their considered and thoughtful suggestions. I will reflect upon what I am trying to express here and perhaps produce what I consider a definitive version soon.

Well, here's another. At your level of technical expertise and defined aesthetic sensibility, the "definitive" version is the one defined by you. The rest of the world can like it or lump it---the level of your combined facture is pretty much beyond valid objective (quantitative) criticism, and the more qualitative (not subjective, yet...) critical analysis that is valid is narrowed considerably.

[LaHo]

The S-M-C Takumar 6x7 135mm/4.0 is an old, but fine lens. My copy suffers from far from snappy aperture blades, but the results have been perfectly OK.



Camera: Pentax 67 II
Lens: S-M-C Pentax 6x7 135mm F4.0 and K2 yellow filter
Exposure: 1/350 @ F6.7
Film: Rollei RPX 400 dev. in D-76 1+1 in the Jobo ATL-1500 film processor

[sculptormic]

Scheveningen
Pentax 645Z DA 28-45

[mattb123]

645D & Arsat 30/3.5 (new copy)

[ivanvernon]

645D & Arsat 30/3.5 (new copy)

Nice. These two shots bode well for your Arsat. On scenes without a lot of straight lines, the fisheye effect is hardly noticeable.

---------- Post added 03-15-18 at 01:39 AM ----------

Scheveningen
Pentax 645Z DA 28-45

Very nice. This word "Scheveningen," I was once told by an old friend, now deceased, is almost impossible for non-Dutch speakers to pronounce properly. My friend informed me that he had been a teenage member of the Dutch underground resistance in Nazi-held Rotterdam, and their group used "Scheveningen" as their password because German soldiers could not pronounce it. He told me that inability to pronounce the word in some instances meant instant death. The folks in Rotterdam whom I have met even to this day are still not much fond of German visitors even though they are much better behaved than their countrymen from back in the 1940s.

[BostonUKshooter]

645D & Arsat 30/3.5 (new copy)

Hi Matt - these images look very 'clean'...with seemingly good resolution?....you mentioned "(new copy)" in your post....did you have to try out several Arsat 30mm to get a good one?...I didn't see your previous posts on the subject.....also is the angle of view a full 'fisheye' effect?? Regards, Ian

[vaderwasframed]

Pentax 6x7MLU, SMC Takumar 45mm f/4, red filter on Ilford 100 Delta Pro B+W film (MLU engaged, 1/60 sec @ f/11)

Attached Images

 

[Ed Hurst]

Well, here's another. At your level of technical expertise and defined aesthetic sensibility, the "definitive" version is the one defined by you. The rest of the world can like it or lump it---the level of your combined facture is pretty much beyond valid objective (quantitative) criticism, and the more qualitative (not subjective, yet...) critical analysis that is valid is narrowed considerably.

Thanks - I agree with what you're saying - that it's on the artist creating the image that the definitive version depends. That was always my intention - I was merely inviting other perspectives and reactions into my musing process, because, sometimes it is exploratory and experimental. In the end, I will decide what feels closest to what I am expressing. That may not align with others' feedback, but the input nonetheless helps me at times like this to think and feel my way to the final decision.

[mattb123]

Hi Matt - these images look very 'clean'...with seemingly good resolution?....you mentioned "(new copy)" in your post....did you have to try out several Arsat 30mm to get a good one?...I didn't see your previous posts on the subject.....also is the angle of view a full 'fisheye' effect?? Regards, Ian

Thanks, and yeah, for a cheap old lens these do pretty well. I sometimes apply some distortion correction but these were shot pretty level and without any straight lines in the frame so they look ok without it. I usually do some CA removal too but's just a checkbox in Lightroom so not hard to do. These are both cropped slightly (maybe 10%) to eliminate some distractions and frame better. They are also not that fishy on digital because they are film-era lenses and there's some crop factor in play here for the smaller sensor.

This is my second copy. My old one was ok optically but was getting loose between the barrel sections and I was worried it might fall apart. I just decided to get another one instead of putting a lot of effort or money into fixing the old one which is headed to eBay as-is.

[rdenney]

With fisheyes, straight lines that go through the center of the image remain straight. That can be a tool for minimizing the fishiness.

Rick “who often composes the horizon in the center and crops to move it off-center” Denney

[Fcsnt54]

well the day yesterday turned out completely different then when it started, 645z with the DFA 55

[ivanvernon]

With fisheyes, straight lines that go through the center of the image remain straight. That can be a tool for minimizing the fishiness.

Rick “who often composes the horizon in the center and crops to move it off-center” Denney

In addition to the straight line concern, it is also true in landscape photography particularly, that there may be land forms whose shape is drastically altered but in a way that is not noticeable except by one who knows the exact scene and land form in question--the shape of a lake, a mountain, etc., meaning that the skewed land form appears in the photo in a credible manner as it well could have existed in reality even though it is altered from that reality. (Maybe that is just a more complex way of saying keep the straight lines in the center!)

[Tom Marvel]

Fashion fun in B&W

[ivanvernon]

Images of shadows and ice, jpegs, no post processing.

KIT: 645Z with Pentax-FA 645 45-85mm

[yucafrita]

Fashion fun in B&W

Great! Reminds me positively of fashion photography in the sixties. You may not know him but over here in Germany F.C. Gundlach was a master of this art.