|
Forum: Lens Clubs
11-04-2014, 11:08 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
02-02-2011, 12:00 PM
|
| |
I got my 2 rolls yesterday in the mail.
The DSLR + slide copier works pretty well, especially for web use. I've printed a couple 8x10s using traditional b&w darkroom tools, and 8x10 digital to compare, and it looks pretty darn close...but it's still obviously digitized.
I can't afford any scanner better than a cheapo flat-bed, so it's the best I've got.
|
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
01-22-2011, 08:10 PM
|
| |
I ended up getting my 2 rolls in on the last day. They said it'll be another 2-3 weeks before they ship, as of middle of last week. I got my DSLR slider copier setup ready for it to show up so I can post.
As for what I'll replace it with (only ever shot the 2 rolls), I liked the results I got from Velvia 50, more so than Ektachrome (seemed to have less of a distinct character), but that's obviously not suitable for everything. I need to try some of the 400-speed portrait films out there, especially in 120 size.
I have almost a full brick of expired 135 Elite Chrome that I got for super cheap, so I'll burn through that and cross-process some of it in the mean-time.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-18-2011, 08:08 PM
|
| |
I've got an M13 sitting in front of me that fits all of your noted markings exactly.
-MFD isn't marked exactly, but it's less than 1foot. Judging from the distance from the 1ft mark to the 1.5ft mark, I'd hazard .85 or .9ft as a MFD, which seems to be backed up by my decidedly unscientific "testing" in the field.
-6 aperture blades.
-Front element/filter ring do not turn with focus adjustments.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-10-2011, 12:47 PM
|
| |
I have the Canon mount copy of the non-HSM older version. It's one of my most-used lenses. It flares more than I'd like sometimes, and the 82mm filter size is a bugger. It's heavy and big, since it'll do full-frame, too. I also don't like the fact you have to flip a switch AND pop the focus ring to go from MF to AF, the MF gear ratio is really fast (not super precise), and it's not always as sharp as my Tak or Canon AF primes (even at f/8 or smaller), but it is sharp enough to make 20x30 inch prints that look good from a 10 inches away on my 10MP digital. It's not perfect, but it definitely gets the job done and doesn't ever give me any "issues." AF is good, not super quiet, but I've never had that affect anything. The semi-macro capabilities are really nice, too. I like it more and more, and still use it all the time.
I've thought about selling it or giving it to my girlfriend and upgrading to the HSM version, but I tend towards using fast primes when I have the choice, so I'll probably keep it until it dies, upgrading my primes first and then go for the Canon 24-70L once this one dies.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-04-2011, 07:56 PM
|
| |
Look for "catch lights" in your subject's eyes. It's really really hard to find a nice portrait without some kind of catchlight. Give more distance from subject to background, it will blur even more and you'll be able to stop down to f/2.8 to get more of her face in focus without having a distracting background. I'd work towards finding some more flattering (diffused/softer) light so you expose for skin properly without losing too much on highlights. Indoor light at night tends to look like...indoor light at night which looks worse in photos than when you are there in the scene. The green tint isn't flattering, nor are fairly high saturation levels on portraits (watch your reds, especially).
Not all of his work is with L glass (or even super-fast lenses), but it's good equipment nonetheless. Full frame definitely changes aspect towards shallow DOF, but a fairly fast prime on APS-C is a good substitute if you are careful about how you compose the scene. Look at the light on the faces, especially the lack of "hotspots" and you'll realize why shade is better than out in bright sunlight.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
01-03-2011, 07:14 PM
|
| |
Super Takumar 85mm f/1.9 at f/1.9:
Recesky 35mm TLR (Build It Yourself Kit)
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-03-2011, 06:50 PM
|
| |
A little setup might not be a bad thing. I'd lose the flash, try to include a bit more of her face, try some different perspectives.
If she's a ham as you say, get her to work with you on a few versions. Nice way to burn time at family gatherings, if you're not too into the gathering part.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-03-2011, 06:29 PM
|
| |
I like that quite a bit better.
Do you?
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-03-2011, 06:27 PM
|
| |
Here's my last bit of advice:
-Stop saying you aren't that good. You're as good as you want to be.
-Practice, practice, practice! Experiment when you take each shot. Even if that means self-portraiture, or shooting pictures of the dog/cat when you've got some time to burn and aren't trying to make "memory" shots.
-Your gear isn't limiting you. I guarantee it. It's always easier to blame the gear than work around any "issues" it may have.
-Slap that Nokton on there, put away the flash, and move with your feet. Try some different perspectives, too.
Keep at it, just shoot a whole bunch. You'll see improvement every time you pull the camera out.
Cheers!
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 07:19 PM
|
| |
I'd suggest finding a way to diffuse the light sources you are using. They are casting hard-edged shadows which aren't too flattering to women's faces unless you are very specific in how you use them. They also give odd-looking pin-point catchlights in subject eyes.
Try setting up a big reflector, using the spill from your main to bounce off reflector for some fill, and then using your 2nd light on the background. No light on the background is killing these shots, IMO.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 07:00 PM
|
| |
Are you doing some skin blurring? It looks a little heavily done, or maybe your lens/body combo has a back-focus issue (looks like the hair on the back of her head is in focus more than her face).
Fingernails on the b&w version are distracting, but you did a good job on conversion. I don't like how there's no separation of her dark hair from the dark background, it looks like a floating face.
Keep working with her, you should experiment more with lighting. Throw up some reflectors (you can have her hold them, too!) or gobos to add some drama and make some BIG catchlights in her eyes. You've got a great opportunity and good basic skills, keep shooting!
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 06:55 PM
|
| |
I'd like to see these without the bounce, or at least with a bit of negative flash compensation to lessen the shadows from the bounced flash.
ISO 800 on your camera should be fine, and f/2.8 would be plenty sharp for any print up to 8x10.
Do you have a fast prime? That'd let you shoot at a wide aperture, same shutter, and get more natural looking light into the image.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 06:52 PM
|
| |
My eye gets led right down the tunnel, right past your intended subject. Get close to the graffiti you want to show, shoot it straight on. Otherwise, I'm just wondering why you left in the tire tracks.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 06:48 PM
|
| |
SMF wins the cropping game. Vast improvement over original.
Seeing it very large would help.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 06:45 PM
|
| |
Seems like a scene that would not need any HDR to retain dark/light values.
I'd put some more contrast into the scene near the bridge and reduce it on the striations of the ice a bit, to put your viewer's eye right where you were looking.
Lens should be plenty sharp at f/4.5, DOF notwithstanding. I'd probably have gone to ISO 400 and stopped down a bit to get the ice more in focus.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 06:40 PM
|
| |
Nice job on the edits as is, I quite like it. Looking deeper, I would change:
Localized contrast adjustments and some dodging and burning, to pull your focus immediately to the roadway, and not the trees on the left/lone skinny tree on the right side. Using those as framing as you do is a good move, so I wouldn't crop too much differently than you did. The other most interesting part is the branch on the top of the frame, and so I'd up the contrast there as well.
I just wish there was one final point of interest, like a dog running down the road, or a fellow walking through the snow to finalize the image.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 06:34 PM
|
| |
Next time, rotate through a bit of focus and spray off 3-5 frames. Any stigma with being an "amateur" if someone has the gall to call you that (or you feel that way yourself right now) will quickly be nullified once you come back to your computer and can make a sharp print.
You also generally have some leeway on finding the best expression if you do this regularly, too.
|
|
Forum: Photo Critique
01-02-2011, 06:28 PM
|
| |
I'd like to see this scene, shot from down by the tracks to lead you into the frame. The trees would then lead your eye up to the suitably epic sky and clouds, and if you picked the right moment, you'd have some motion through the whole frame. As is, it's fairly static compositionally, and the super bright tracks draw my eye away from the nicely colored and figured sky.
Simple is usually better. I see about 4-5 images I could make out of this scene, and hopefully would come away with stronger "statements" for it.
Nits: The clouds on camera right are awfully dark and don't mesh well with the almost blown-out "happy" clouds to camera left. Picking your time of day might help with that (after sun has actually gone below horizon?), as would narrowing your field of view a bit.
Open ground in lower left corner of frame kills it for me. As does bare field (the lighter/brighter color pulls attention away from the sky/tracks) to right edge of frame.
No train on the tracks...
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
12-28-2010, 08:44 PM
|
| |
Super Tak 50mm f/1.4:
TTV (Argus Super Seventy Five) with Super Tak 50mm f/1.4 on #2 extension tube:
 |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
12-27-2010, 08:17 PM
|
| |
I just saw on their website that they need to be at the lab by noon on the 30th. I finished my first/last roll of K200 today, and got 20 shots knocked off of my first/last roll of K64, with tomorrow morning being my last real chance to get to frame 36.
Looks like I'll have to overnight it...this will be an expensive couple of rolls of film.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
12-19-2010, 10:08 PM
|
| |
Large format Kodak lens, with 3 full sets of M42 extension tubes (about as long as a 135mm Takumar w/hood). I think this was wide open at f/4. It doesn't have any markings beyond aperture values anywhere on it, but I'm making an educated guess that it is around 250mm.  |
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
12-19-2010, 09:58 PM
|
| |
Canon 40D
Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4 |
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
12-19-2010, 09:57 PM
|
| |
Canon 40D
SMC Takumar 135mm f/3.5 |
|
Forum: Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras
12-19-2010, 09:23 PM
|
| |
Mt. Laguna Radar Base 
Canon Canonet QL17 GIII
Arista Premium 400ASA @ 800ASA |
