|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-29-2011, 03:09 PM
|
| |
That's a really strong softening effect, by my standards.
I own a couple of original silver prints of Greta Garbo, and - while I don't have documentation on the lens choice - they were obviously shot with either a soft focus lens or an exceptional soft focus technique. The effect is very subtle, but it's noticeable...it adds a smoldering glow to the highlights, almost a coronal feel, without blowing them out.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-28-2011, 09:32 PM
|
| |
Oh, and also: cool print. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-28-2011, 09:22 PM
|
| |
I can't see how it wouldn't be good at focusing at long distances, and if you're dealing with 144" wide prints that are not suffering in the least, I also can't see that any sort of conventional print size would be lacking in acceptable quality, whatsoever.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-28-2011, 08:09 PM
|
| |
Are the "less than stellar" performance issues going to be evident in the finished prints you're planning to make? What size are you considering printing?
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-28-2011, 04:25 PM
|
| |
Thanks for answering my question before it was asked. "Sharp" is a relative term...I was about to check my copy of The Camera to see if there was a specific section on soft focus lenses.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-27-2011, 06:10 AM
|
| |
I'd go wider for landscapes, personally...but I'm still of the opinion that the two are pretty close in focal length, so it's going to depend on the look and "feel" that you want. If you say that you didn't see any real difference, then I'd say you have your answer. Go with the one that simply suits you better.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-25-2011, 07:40 AM
|
| |
I did some research...evidently the 645 and 67 lugs are the same, and the connectors are the same. So, unless there's a physical difference in the placement of the lugs within the surface/frame of the camera itself, there shouldn't be much difference in the two cameras.
The .05" gap was there whether I pushed on the connector or not...I tried to actually rock it back and forth to make it hit the camera body, but couldn't do it. Very little play in the mounting, no matter how it rotated. I think it has something to do with the straps, personally. The flocking is a great idea...I had considered a very thin nylon washer spaced behind the lug itself, acting as a surface bearing for the connector to rotate upon...this would not allow any metal-to-plastic contact.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-25-2011, 07:35 AM
|
| |
That's for you to decide. Personally, it seems like you have a nice collection going...but that's coming from the guy that only has one lens. :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-24-2011, 09:08 AM
|
| |
Warning: Uneducated Response Incoming
How about I throw another curve and ask you about neither, and instead ask: "What are you going to be using the lens to do, specifically?"
45mm and 55mm are really close, in my opinion...and unless one or the other is appreciably (read: "I can tell, when looking at reasonable enlargements") sharper, the driving factors for me would be ergonomics, quality and price.
With that said, I'd still like to know which one is sharper. :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-24-2011, 08:58 AM
|
| |
A manual 120mm macro can be had for $500, in great shape. That's not too bad. I saw a few 400's on ebay for $800-ish. I check KEH often, as well...everything I've gotten from there as been in better condition than they described. I just picked up a k-mount lens for someone else the other day...and I have two Nikon lenses from there as well. I'd rather go to them than eBay any day of the week...I just trust the descriptions more.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-24-2011, 08:45 AM
|
| |
Are the lugs different on the 67s than on the 645s? I just looked at mine, and there's no contact at all between the strap connector and the body surface...I didn't put a feeler gauge to it, but I'd say that there's about .05" of gap between the two surfaces on each side. I'm trying to figure out how the connector can hit the body at all... :confused:
(This is what I get for being new at this...there's probably some sort of bonehead answer that I'm not considering.)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-23-2011, 04:35 AM
|
| |
Fifty bucks is way too much.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-22-2011, 09:40 PM
|
| |
I found a pair on eBay for about $20, or so. Official Pentax, no ears. Works great!
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-22-2011, 09:39 PM
|
| |
I buy a lot from B&H, because they seem to have things in stock whenever Adorama or Freestyle is out. And I find it hard to navigate Freestyle's website. Last time I bought film, it was $3.75 a roll.
As for the film selection itself, I use Kodak's Tri-X in 400 speed (400TX) and I rate it at 160 in my 645N (and pretty much everything else) when I develop it in HC-110...this gives a subtle softness with deep grays and sharp edges. However, I also rate Tri-X at 1600 and develop in Diafine, and it gives a wonderfully eerie, haunting look...dark and deep and gloomy. I love the versatility; I can use it with slower lenses and filters in daylight and get wonderful landscapes and street scenes, etc...or I can pair it with fast f1.2 lenses and basically shoot at 1/500th walking around a fair or carnival at night. It's a great film.
Piece of advice: once you select a film, STAY WITH IT UNTIL YOU LEARN IT. The best photographers I know have all advised me to do exactly this, and they're right: just like anything else, you have to learn something inside and out before you really know what you can do with it...and once you know that, you can begin to really work. My images have gotten better from not switching films (among other reasons).
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-22-2011, 09:27 PM
|
| |
I used to think that if I had a better camera, or a better lens...or even just a different camera and lens...that I'd be a better photographer. No such luck. It's the same as buying a new set of pots and pans and thinking that you'll instantly cook a better meal. Ever since I had that thought, I stopped buying things unless I knew I had a very good reason to do so. Example: when I photograph people out in the streets, I carry a tiny little Rollei 35 that I inherited. I'm not that good with it. I suppose I could go the classic Leica-clad route if I wanted a better camera, but all I'd be doing is dropping about $3000 into a setup that would take the same pictures as the no-cost Rollei. So I haven't bought something else. Instead, I had the Rollei tuned up, I bought a filter or two that helped me out, and I found a film/developer combo that got me the look that I wanted. I even made a cheap little wrist strap out of scrap paracord. I don't have 5% of the cost of that Leica setup invested, and I'm getting better pictures because I'm learning to use what I have. That's how a photographer gets better, I think...but most photographers don't get better. They just get lucky.
And now I feel all self-righteous and dignified...which means that I'll probably wake up at four in the morning with a craving for a new lens for my 645. I just put a hex on the whole damn thing... :D
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-22-2011, 12:05 PM
|
| |
I own a digital camera? Huh, I didn't even know that! AWESOME! I love finding stuff I didn't know I had!:lol:
You bring up a good point...using the big film camera slows me down a lot. I was out with someone the other day that has a brand new D5100, and after two solid hours of shooting in rapidly-changing afternoon/evening light we totaled up how many frames we'd shot. Results: I shot exactly 32, because I only allowed myself two rolls of film...and he shot 655.
Thanks to everyone for making me feel welcome, by the way. Great forum!
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-22-2011, 05:48 AM
|
| |
I had to look up LBA. I'm not too much into buying lenses. I have one lens for my 645 and can only think of a second that I might want, and I have a tendency to only use one or two lenses anyway, even out of the arsenal of glassware I have for my Nikons. With that said, I'm probably going to start any day now. :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-22-2011, 05:40 AM
|
| |
I kind of doubt it, too, but I don't want to be unsure at $10 per roll, or so. :D I'm having trouble finding a graph for the film I want to use, also, but I know it has narrow bands of sensitivity, so hopefully any IR would be over the top limit of the film's response.
Yes, it has a data imprint on the bottom edge of the negative. Frame number, shutter speed, aperture, exposure compensation and focal length, I believe. A nice little line of numbers. I know the NII adds mirror lockup and a couple of other things, but the data imprinting came about on the N (one of the reasons I got it over the NII actually).
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-21-2011, 11:25 PM
|
| |
I'm setting up to (hopefully) shoot some IR film, and I'm hoping that someone might be able to help me here, or point me to a thread or webpage that I simply haven't found...
Question: What internal infrared light exists in the 645N? Will any present affect IR film?
After searching off and on for a few days, I finally called Pentax to simply ask whether or not there were any internal IR sources in the camera...frame counter, data imprinting, etc. I think they were taken aback by a question about a film camera. Now, I didn't get a conclusive answer, but I did learn the following:
- The 645N uses "some internal infrared" but they didn't know the actual wavelength, or really even where it came from.
- Pentax doesn't test with IR film, so they aren't sure if any IR light will affect IR film, or not.
- The 75mm f2.8 lens has an IR focus shift mark, which may or may not be a holdover from earlier lenses...i.e. it may never have been officially tested with infrared, since Pentax doesn't test with IR film. Arg!
I've also heard that the frame counter is NOT infrared, and that the data imprinting is not a factor with films in the 750nm range. I'm planning to shoot 820nm film, and I haven't seen much information on that in the 645N. I know the safe thing to do is to step back to a totally manual camera, but I really want to use the bigger format.
Any help is much appreciated. I suppose if nothing else, I can waste a few dollars. :D
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-21-2011, 06:43 PM
|
| |
Thank you on both counts...I need all the luck I can get. I'm really bad at it...but it's keeping Kodak and Oriental and Sprint in business. :D
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-21-2011, 06:29 PM
|
| |
Yeah, I get told that a lot, for some reason. ;)
|
|
Forum: Welcomes and Introductions
12-21-2011, 05:47 PM
|
| |
I'm not much of a gear-head and I only have one Pentax, but I'm starting to grow rather fond of the thing and I thought I'd actually register on the forum rather that simply browsing anonymously. So, thanks - belatedly - for all the great information that I've found, and thanks in advance to whomsoever manages to answer my forthcoming inane questions. :D
|
