Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-18-2015, 05:37 PM - 2 Likes   #11221
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,813
I just got back from a 5 day trip to Washington D.C. I went there (with my family) as part of the ALS Association for National ALS Advocacy Day, where we went to Capitol Hill to advocate for various issues relating to ALS.
Here's on of the first photos I took while in D.C.



Contax G2
Carl Zeiss Planar T* 35/2
Kodak Portra 400
Epson V500


05-19-2015, 01:08 AM   #11222
Veteran Member
Cuthbert's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,573
Very Coltonial, how is the G2? I heard it's a good rangefinder...
05-19-2015, 09:00 AM   #11223
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,813
QuoteOriginally posted by Cuthbert Quote
Very Coltonial, how is the G2? I heard it's a good rangefinder...
Thanks
The Contax G2 is a superb camera. Although it's technically a rangefinder, in use it's more like an autofocus super P&S. Looking through the viewfinder, you don't really get any visual focus confirmation, nor is there a rangefinder patch. What you do get is autofocus lock (on AF-S), and a distance scale in the finder, which tells you how far away the camera is focused. There is also a small LCD on top of the camera which gives that distance reading. For manual focusing, once the focus switch is set to MF, the distance scale will change to a small row of dots. By placing the AF frame on your subject, and turning the manual focus wheel, the number of dots will change. 1 dot means correct focus, 2 or more dots mean incorrect focus.
It's definitely a camera that some will love, and many will have trouble with.
I've found the autofocus to be very accurate, but you really need to pay attention to what your AF frame is on, and what the distance scale says. If you're taking a photo of something 6 feet away but the scale reads infinity, then your subject will not be in focus.
Many have complained about it having a small viewfinder, but I never found it to be an issue.
The build quality, fit and finish, and the overall feel of the camera are all excellent.
The lenses are some of the best AF lenses available.
05-19-2015, 12:13 PM - 1 Like   #11224
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,231
QuoteOriginally posted by skierd Quote
Colton - have you thought about putting a book together to raise money for ALS research? You've definitely got the body of work for it in my opinion.
Now there is an idea that should have wings...


Steve

05-19-2015, 12:14 PM   #11225
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,231
QuoteOriginally posted by Swift1 Quote
This was taken just to see what kind of bokeh the Tri-Lauser triplet could produce. Shot wide open at minimum focus distance.


Toyocaflex TLR Type Ib
Tri-Lausar Anastigmat 8cm/3.5
Expired Fujicolor Reala 100 @iso 25
Epson V500
Swirls!


Steve
05-19-2015, 12:46 PM   #11226
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: FL
Posts: 246
These are from February, taken the same time as the other car photos. Just finally got through the roll and got it developed. Took three weeks just for the processing.

On a side note, Walmart has dramatically increased their 120 send out prices. A few months ago it was under $2 to develop and get (crappy) 4x4 prints. Today it was $11.52 / roll. I guess I will either be finding somewhere else or shoot less medium format.

Camera was a Rolleiflex Automat Tessar 3.5 loaded with Ektar 100







05-19-2015, 12:52 PM   #11227
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 951
So far I've used dwaynes photo for my 120 needs. C41 prices are pretty reasonable and I haven't found a lab that's less expensive yet.
05-19-2015, 01:06 PM   #11228
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,813
QuoteOriginally posted by samtr87 Quote
These are from February, taken the same time as the other car photos. Just finally got through the roll and got it developed. Took three weeks just for the processing.

On a side note, Walmart has dramatically increased their 120 send out prices. A few months ago it was under $2 to develop and get (crappy) 4x4 prints. Today it was $11.52 / roll. I guess I will either be finding somewhere else or shoot less medium format.

Camera was a Rolleiflex Automat Tessar 3.5 loaded with Ektar 100
Gotta love a Tessar
Nice work.

05-19-2015, 04:07 PM   #11229
Veteran Member
Cuthbert's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,573
Attention please! Here you an see some bad film pictures that are not post processed therefore might look dull and boring.

The bad overcast sky and cheap film (Superia 200) combined with the scarce talent of the photographer can increase this perception of the shot, if you don't like it go to the digital board to see uberpostprocessed pics that look perfectly syntethic.





Fujica ST705, 55mm f1.8, Superia 200 and Pentax cloudy filter.
05-19-2015, 05:02 PM   #11230
Pentaxian
cooltouch's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 496
I think you're being a little to hard on yourself. That cheap film delivered well saturated images with very fine grain. Focusing was precise. Subject matter was clear. Hard to go wrong with a classic Corvette Sting Ray. But, gotta question. I don't recognize the hood ornament on that first car.. Looks like a body surfer on an outrigger body board or something -- what make and model is it? Got any more shots of that car you'd like to share?
05-19-2015, 06:40 PM   #11231
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Pensacola Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 128
Tried out Lomography Redscale 100 ISO. Meh. Maybe I'll take it out to the woods next time. The line on the left if from my defective Epson V600 that needs to be sent back.

Pentax 645 45mm

05-19-2015, 07:41 PM   #11232
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,813
QuoteOriginally posted by Cuthbert Quote
Attention please! Here you an see some bad film pictures that are not post processed therefore might look dull and boring.

The bad overcast sky and cheap film (Superia 200) combined with the scarce talent of the photographer can increase this perception of the shot, if you don't like it go to the digital board to see uberpostprocessed pics that look perfectly syntethic.





Fujica ST705, 55mm f1.8, Superia 200 and Pentax cloudy filter.
Looks great to me.

FWIW, any scan of negative film is post processed.
05-19-2015, 08:46 PM   #11233
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: FL
Posts: 246
QuoteOriginally posted by Swift1 Quote
Gotta love a Tessar
Nice work.
Thanks!
05-19-2015, 10:27 PM - 1 Like   #11234
Pentaxian
Swift1's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,813


Contax G2
Carl Zeiss Planar T* 35/2
Kodak Portra 400
Epson V500
05-20-2015, 12:59 AM   #11235
Veteran Member
Cuthbert's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,573
QuoteOriginally posted by cooltouch Quote
I think you're being a little to hard on yourself. That cheap film delivered well saturated images with very fine grain. Focusing was precise. Subject matter was clear. Hard to go wrong with a classic Corvette Sting Ray. But, gotta question. I don't recognize the hood ornament on that first car.. Looks like a body surfer on an outrigger body board or something -- what make and model is it? Got any more shots of that car you'd like to share?
I have been facetious because yesterday for the first time I received a warning from the moderators because it appears I'd been roughing up the digital guys who use post process to sharpen and increase the contrast of their old lenses for then showing up how cool these lenses are, It told them that IMO the sharpness and constrast of a lens should be judged on film and posted two pics of mine with the same lens, then one of these guys said my pics were crap because they were flat, boring, lacked contrast, sharpness, bla bla...all because they were taken with an overcast sky (like these ones) so as you know the light is different in comparison to a full sunny day.

Then I told him that thread was so filled with digital stuff that Michael Bay would have been proud of them and I assume they got offended...but please I've enough of the CGI crapfest we see on the cinema, digital photography is the still version of that IMO.

However, these shots were taken at the Heritage Centre where I casually found a rally of historic cars (surprise surprise, they have one almost every other weekend) while I was testing the small Fujinon system I got last week, I didn't look for stellar pics, just to check out camera and lenses were OK, unfortunately the weather was what we see but I can't rule the clouds yet.

The "spirit of ecstasy" in question looks like a sort of joke from the owner of these small British cars from the 50s, I am not familiar with them, they looked like the English answer to the Fiat 500 or something like that, very rockabilly, here there are other pics:



The ST705 has a nice partial almost semispotmeter with gallium cells, to take the naked lady fine I underexposed the rest of the pic but I liked because I got more saturated 50s colours. Of course the digital boys photoshopping here and there can do better, right?





Other pics you would appreciate I assume:



Checked on the negative, the nose of the shark is present but they cropped it out from the scans, I know I SHOULD scan myself so at least I can have a 24:36 image.

All these pics were taken with the 28mm f2.8 so I had to go very close to the subject and in some cases I got some perspective distortion, but it's unpleasant.

This is a shot with the 55mm:



This is a shot with the zoom of another commodity very common in the area besides classic cars: sheep. They have seas of sheep.

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!
architecture, details, ektar, exposure, film, goats, grandma, hood, kodachrome, kodak, lab, legs, lens, lunch, lx, mx, pentax, phil, photos, post, q7, roll, sarajevo, scans, shot, shots, steve, thanks, tokina, velvia
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K20D test shots at Lets Go Digital schufosi777 Pentax News and Rumors 6 04-20-2013 11:31 AM
Macro Cool Macro shots derajjjg Post Your Photos! 2 12-27-2009 09:36 PM
Lets see your Moon and Mars shots Igilligan Post Your Photos! 9 12-05-2009 08:55 AM
Way cool bat shots and General Talk 7 10-01-2009 02:54 AM
Cool Shots & Info Fl_Gulfer Post Your Photos! 0 12-10-2007 11:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:14 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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