Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Showing results 1 to 25 of 120 Search: Liked Posts
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 4 Days Ago  
6x7 fungus
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 6
Views: 347
I would also blast it with ultraviolet to kill the fungus.

All lens faults either degrade the image unacceptably or they don’t. If pixel peeping and the overall image quality pleases you, then use the lens and enjoy it.

As with any flaw, make sure it is shaded. Off-axis light exposes flaws.

Rick “judging lenses by the images they make” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 05-03-2019, 08:09 AM  
FA 45-85mm at 85.....any good?
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 8
Views: 1,010
The 45-85 is completely competent at 85, as long as you stop down to F/8 or so. Don’t expect the same performance as a new 90, but at around one-tenth the price it’s a solid addition to the bag.

Rick “for whom it rarely stays home” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 11-15-2019, 07:52 PM  
Come on Pentax where’s next 645 !?
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 117
Views: 9,851
My 645z and 645nII were both bought new, as was my FA 45-85 and my three flash units and various other accessories.

I didn’t buy my 28-45 new—I let you do that :)

But Pentax could operate a refurbishment and certified pre-owned program that, with reasonable prices, could help capture secondary-market profits.

Rick “who buys new when it makes sense, but who would pay a premium to buy used from Pentax” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 06-03-2018, 09:04 PM  
Grand Lens Test 5: The Arsat 30mm Fisheye
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 4
Views: 1,433
Series Contents

Okay, I'm going off the reservation for this one, partly because I promised it in another thread.

Pentax makes one medium-format fisheye, a 35mm full-frame fisheye for the Pentax 67. I have used that lens extensively, but I can also attest that it suffers from significant lateral chromatic aberration that has to be corrected. But at least it can be corrected. I made this photo using that lens, on an island off Cape Cod where I put together a photo book several years ago:

Bigelow Point in the Round, 2012
Kodak Ektar, Pentax 6x7, SMC Takumar 35mm Fisheye.

But 35mm is a bit long for a fisheye on 645, and especially for cropped 645. So, I decided to adapt my Arsat 30mm fisheye to the 645z to see if it would perform better. TLDR: It does.

Quick history for those who don't know it: After WWII, as "reparations", the Soviet government cleaned out the Zeiss factory in Jena of some of its tooling, materials, and knowhow, and pushed it over to the Arsenal factory in Kiev, Ukraine. They particularly took the machinery for making Contax cameras, which were "duplicated" in Kiev, giving evidence to the fact that it ain't just the tools that make the camera. But the Soviets also set up an optical factory at Arsenal, and nobody can claim the Soviets didn't know how to design optics. Starting in the 70's, they created two new cameras: The Salyut, later known as the Kiev 88, which was a re-creation of the old Hasselblad 1600f, which, unlike later 'blads like the 500 and 501, used a focal-plane shutter. The other camera they made was the Kiev 6C, later known as the Kiev 60. This was a simplification of the Praktisix, which was later known as the Pentacon Six. Both adopted the Praktica-style SLR format, which was as much as any the successor to the Exakta camera, and the forerunner of Japaneses SLR's. (We should remember that Pentax bought what became its brand name from Pentacon). These are the cameras that established the horizontal-travel SLR format that became the de facto standard for small-format SLRs. So, there were three competing form factors for professional cameras in medium format at the time: The box SLR (Hasselblad, preceded by the original Exakta 66), the twin-lens reflex (Rolleiflex), and the horizontal travel SLR (Pentacon Six, which followed the Exakta Kine model--essentially the modern SLR form factor, and a fully integrated version of a Leica with a Visoflex). The SLR's of the late 50's and later emerged from these, including all the Japanese SLR's. Among professional medium-format cameras, most makers followed the first two form factors. Mamiya started with a 6x6 TLR, but later made box SLR's in 6x7 and 645. Bronica and Kowa made box SLR's. Norita was the exception--during the 60's, they made horizontal-travel SLR's like the Pentacon, but they didn't last. And then Pentax took that form factor to the highest form it ever achieved in medium format: The Pentax 6x7 and its successors.

Back to the Soviets: They wanted a cheap version of the Pentacon Six for internal use that could use the same lenses, and this became the Kiev 60. But they also made their own line of lenses for it, and the optics were usually available in both the Pentacon Six mount and the Kiev 88 mount. The Pentacon Six mount is a breech-lock mount, with the lock ring on the camera. One aligns the pin at the top, inserts the lens, and turns the ring to clamp it down. The Kiev 88 mount is a partial-screw mount similar to (but not the same as) the original Hasselblad mount.

Adapters for Pentacon Six lenses for use on Pentax 645 cameras are made by Hartblei, which is a coalition of ex-Arsenal employees, and by Arax, which is a (maybe) different coalition of ex-Arsenal employees. I have owned one of these adapters for years, so that I could use the incomparable Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 180mm f/2.8 lens on my 645NII, as a portrait lens. That lens is, for me, the absolute gold standard for creamy bokeh.

I've owned this Arsat Fisheye for nearly 20 years, and used it extensively on my Kiev 60's, Exakta 66, and Kiev 88cm. Believe me, it's much happier on a Pentax.

A fisheye lens makes a round image of a diameter a little less than three times its focal length. So, a 30mm fisheye provides a 180-degree field of view across the corners of the 6x6 frame, which is 80mm. A 180-degree full-frame fisheye for the 645z would need to be about 20mm in focal length, but none are made. Nevertheless, a fisheye a bit longer than that still provides an extraordinary sweeping view. Note that it is not necessary for a fisheye to be all that fishy. For subjects where straight lines can cross through the center, or where forms are round instead of rectilinear, the fisheye can actually be less distorted looking than a rectilinear lens.

Here's my test scene wtih the (already wide) 35mm FA lens, just for comparison:

And here is the same scene on a much duller day with the Arsat Fisheye:

Clearly, the Arsat pulls in a lot more of the scene.

Here's a 1:1 crop from the center at f/3.5:

So, wide open is for composing and focusing, because even in the center, it's a little soft and suffers from significant flare that reduces contrast. Also, the camera struggles to fine the right exposure with this lens wide open--the result was about a stop underexposed. (I placed the camera in Av mode, with the lens stopped down).

Here's a 1:1 crop of the center at f/11:

That's a lot better. This image shows no sharpening, but when sharpened, this image would became pretty crisp. And remember that this is a pretty tiny portion of the center of an image that would be 7 feet wide at the 100 pixels/inch most people have on their screens.

With ultra-wides, the corners really tell the story. Here's the upper right corner, at 1:1 and f/3.5:

The color fringing is pretty bad--lots of lateral chromatic aberration (but not as much as with the Takumar Fisheye--trust me). This is easy to fix in software, as shown below:

Photoshop might do a bit better job of repairing the lateral color--this is what I could do as a non-expert with DXO Mark Photolab, which I'm just learning to use. Remember, this is the corner at f/3.5.

Let's look at the lower right corner, which is much closer to the camera than the focus point, at f/3.5:

It's either out of focus or the corner performance is limited at f/3.5.

This corner at f/11 looks a lot sharper:

I corrected for lateral color in the above, but as you can see, the software occasionally misses some.

Is this usable? Yes, for smaller prints. But let's see if we can sharpen it up enough to be usable:

That helps, but this would not meet my definition of endless detail in a 7-foot wide print. But it does for smaller prints.

The bottom line is that I would not expect a $200 lens from the Soviet bloc to out-do something really expensive from Japan or West Germany. But I think it will meet my definition of endlessly sharp in a 16x20 print, which is the biggest print I can make.

But there simply is no alternative, so I work as carefully as I can and just limit how big a print I can make.

Rick "not bad for a couple of C-notes" Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 11-10-2019, 03:31 PM  
Post your medium format photos!
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 13,935
Views: 2,340,876
Tuco’s graveyard brought this to mind from about ten years ago. I like his better.

Tombstones, Floyd, Virginia, 2009
Pentax 67, 55 “SMC Pentax”, on Fuji Reala.

Rick “not posting 645z stuff for complaints of lost sharpness” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 10-29-2019, 03:54 PM  
New 645z owner. What computing power am I going to need to handle these raws?
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 39
Views: 1,748
Which is why I suggested thinking through his RAID strategy carefully.

But there are ways to add redundancy without RAID. One is Unraid, which I use on my backup server. Unraid builds network share folders across drives, but does not split files apart. It also maintains a parity drive in the array. With those strategies, a failed disk can be regenerated, but even two failed disks will not make the files on the remaining disks unreadable. And it’s cheap.

If I wanted to take advantage of a 10G network, I’d have to think of something else—the consumer computers in that case can’t keep up. But I only make deep backups every month.

I do not make a thousand photos a day like some do. I’m careful with the button, and say “100 MB” to myself every time I fire the shutter. But as a long-time large-format photographer, I have never adopted a run-n-gun approach, even when I do events.

The new version of Unraid will, I believe, allow up to 40 TB of storage in its cheaper form. But it’s been a while since I built mine, and I’m not up to date.

Rick “mitigating, not eliminating risk” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 10-29-2019, 01:05 PM  
New 645z owner. What computing power am I going to need to handle these raws?
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 39
Views: 1,748
That describes my situation pretty well, though I was able to make a 1.5 GB image composition using Photoshop and Photomerge. I have 16 GB of RAM, a 64GB SSD for the Photoshop scratch file, and a 1.5 TB disk drive. That drive is starting to fill up, and I have an 8 TB drive ready to be installed. The processor is nearly a decade old now.

I make backups (daily, weekly, and monthly) to an external Unraid server with (currently) 13 TB capacity. The point of RAID is to increase speed by striping across multiple disks, not to increase reliability, so choose you RAID strategy carefully.

Rick “sustaining a FireWire interface for the Nikon scanner” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 10-29-2019, 01:29 PM  
645Z -- Fine Art Photography :lol:
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 13
Views: 839
The standard technique for lighting is to use crossed polarizers, turned one way over the lights and then adjusted on the lenses to eliminate specular reflections from the artwork surface. Large light boxes make it harder, not easier.

The shorter the lens, the more reflections will be a problem, because reflected light will be admitted from a wider range of directions. Short lenses also have more vignetting, which will require correction in post.

I did a similar project using a P67 and a 135mm macro lens. You don’t need a macro lens for magnification, you need it for flatness of field. That said, the 55 DFA is sharp enough and flat enough, despite the reports that it has a curved field, at f/5.6. I wouldn’t go wider, even if it meant requiring art to be moved to a set to be photographed.

Rick “not an easy project” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 10-29-2019, 04:00 PM  
645Z -- Fine Art Photography :lol:
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 13
Views: 839
Have you tried it?

I have, and large soft boxes created specular reflections all over the paintings. Scrimming those out scrimmed out all the illumination. It’s hard enough with cross-polarized light.

Oil paintings are often glossy and highly textured. Glass-covered watercolors are easier.

But do what you want. Not my gig.

Rick “not a beginner” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 07-25-2019, 07:59 AM  
Finding wide angle lenses for the 645 d
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 14
Views: 871
A. I don’t think the DFA lenses cover the film format, but others will know those details better than I. I guess I’ve never fitted my two digital-era lenses to my 645NII.

B. “Normal” is strictly a convention. Large-format photographers describe focal length as “short”, “normal” or “long”, just as a convenience for discussion. Perspective is entirely controlled by camera position, and focal length only controls how much of the scene will be included in the image from that position. For portraits, long lenses require longer distances (if you want more than just the subject’s nose in the picture), and when viewing a small piece of a scene from a long distance, perspective will seem compressed. But the lens is merely constraining possible camera positions, and camera positions are doing the work of perspective relationships.

“Wide angle”, “normal”, and “telephoto” have to do with lens design, not focal length in relation to format. Wide-angle lenses have wider coverage relative to focal length, which is needed by shorter lenses and larger formats. For SLRs, they are also retrofocus, meaning the distance to the rear node is longer than the focal length, which makes a short focal length possible in front of a deep mirror box. A telephoto lens has a distance to the rear node shorter than the focal length, making fitting on a shorter bellows possible. Normal lenses are often wide-angle designs to accommodate camera movements.

Fora camera like the 645z, I think in terms of short and long, and normal is just a convenient label.

Rick “not normal” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 07-25-2019, 05:52 AM  
Finding wide angle lenses for the 645 d
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 14
Views: 871
Learn lens lengths in relation to the film diameter. This is a model, and all models are false even though some are useful. This one is useful.

Those who have broad multi-format experience soon give up trying to equate focal lengths across formats, and instead learn what focal lengths are long and short for that format.

150mm is a format-diameter baseline for 4x5 large format, for example. And 75mm is half that while 300mm is twice that.

So, if 55 is the format-diameter baseline for 645 digital, then 23 is half that and 110 is twice that. Therefore, 23 on a 645D is like 75 on 4x5.

Likewise, 70 is the format-diameter baseline for 645 film, so 35 is half that and 140 is twice that.

Round to the nearest available lens. The 25 for the 645d is closest to the 35 for 645 film, if you can find (er...afford) one.

I have a 65 for 4x5, a 35 for 645 film, a 45 for 6x7, a 21 for 24x36, and a 12 for APS-C. All are half the format diameter or less. That’s why the lack of a lens in the 20-25 range for the 645 digital represents a hole. But the 28 end of the 28-45 has been useful enough.

When you change format shape, lenses feel different based on how you use that shape, but it’s more productive just to learn them through experience than to try to analyze it out.

Rick “format omnivore” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 06-27-2019, 05:06 PM  
Pentax 6x7 vs 645 systems Advantages and Disadvantages?
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 60
Views: 3,763
My answer: 645 film isn’t providing the marginal improvement over my digital cameras to be relevant, and now with the 645z I doubt I will shoot 645 film again.

But I still use my 67, though it takes a pretty good scanner to make it worth the trouble (my Nikon 9000 is good enough—barely).

The lenses for the 67 are one Pentax-made adapter away from use on the 645z.

I think Eric Hendrickson will still CLA 67’s. I’ve had him do that for two of mine. Build that into the cost consideration.

For me, their is a secondary aesthetic enjoyment—the 67 cameras are just so beautiful that they beg to be used. The 645 has the same ingenuity in its design, but it just doesn’t match those acres of slightly brassed (you know, real brass) lacquer-and-leatherette P67. I feel the same way about my Sinar P.

Rick “big camera fetishist” Denney
Forum: Do-It-Yourself 06-16-2018, 07:16 PM  
Tripod Collar for the 645 A* 300/4
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 1
Views: 1,321
Okay, so this just didn't work. Motion blue on every shot. It looked good, and it felt sturdy, but it just isn't enough.

So, I followed the lead of another poster and found Orion telescope rings for the Orion Observer 70. One of the rings has a 1/4-20 thread for piggybacking a camera, and one can attach a lens plate to that spot. These are very heavily constructed and adequately rigid. The lens plate needs a hole drilled for an anti-twist pin, but that's all. It adjusts easily and tightens very securely, and it's also quickly removeable.

I found it on Amazon as "Orion 7369 76mm ID Telescope Tube Rings," at a price of $33, with free shipping.

Here it is:

Of course, the lens plate is extra.

I hope I didn't lead anyone too far astray.

Rick "the proof is in the images" Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 05-24-2019, 11:34 AM  
Come on Pentax where’s next 645 !?
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 117
Views: 9,851
I’m much more interested in their commitment to servicing cameras into the future than in their commitment to make new ones that I can’t afford or won’t buy.

My, how we let sensors make our decisions for us. We demand the cutting edge sensor, then we demand lenses that can perform up to the level of the sensor. Yet in practice, lack of depth of field and camera shake (IBIS or not) will undermine the marginal improvements in both. Don’t misunderstand—results even with those issues can be excellent, but they undermine the value of paying double for double the resolution. And then there’s the computer storage problem. We have a sensor and lenses that can make superb prints FAR bigger than 99.9% of any of us will make, yet here we complain that Pentax isn’t sufficiently feeding our gear acquisition frenzy.

The features that made the 645z the best camera in the market five years ago haven’t gone poof! and left us with substandard work. We complain about Ricoh’s commitment, but what of our commitment to doing quality work with the tools available?

I do not see photography these days that justifies all the kvetching about stuff not being good enough. Except from large format, that is. Instead of a $10K camera with a sensor with 3-micron pixels and lenses that have to cost five large to exploit them, why aren’t we pushing for a 4x5” sensor solution for a Graflok mount? Are we committed to quality or not? Do we want to demonstrate our professional skills or not?

Ricoh should have come out with a 645zII that made incremental improvements two years ago. Better shutter handling with Live View, a faster processor with better video capability—stuff like that. Maybe that would have been sufficiently symbolic to hold the frenzy at bay.

Rick “not really kidding about the need for a 4x5” sensor” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 05-03-2019, 08:23 AM  
Is The Worlds Greatest Camera the 645D and Its CCD Sensor?
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 17
Views: 2,744
The 645D will do everything now that made it the greatest digital camera on the market when it came out. It will do everything that made people line up to pay $10,000 for it then. It will turn out solidly professional results when used with skill (less skill than getting similar results using color film).

It will still outperform even current smaller formats in sheer image quality when using similarly priced lenses.

But it will not do things that newer, more expensive cameras will do in low light. And larger formats require more skill to get excellent results, all else even remotely equal. That has always been true.

Your optical focusing skills will need to be at their best, too, if you take advantage of abundantly available and excellent manual focus lenses.

Rick “not seeing very much photography made great by newer features, though certainly made easier” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 04-19-2019, 12:59 PM  
Post your medium format photos!
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 13,935
Views: 2,340,876
Heh—you needed a headphone cord with a 1/4” phone plug for that subject.

Rick “who owns a suitable prop” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 03-27-2019, 02:17 PM  
It's all about the size (of the viewfinder)
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 31
Views: 2,669
Banding at high speeds is a known issue for Salyuts and 88’s. Poke around in the Kiev Report archive, on Delphi Forums, for much discussion of that issue. Usually it’s not a problem at 125 or lower even for the worst examples. My Arax-overhauled 88c bands at 500.

Your camera needs new light seals, too. Arax might overhaul it for you, which should take care of that.

Rick “eccentric gears” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 11-29-2018, 03:10 PM  
is a 645D worth buying today?
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 24
Views: 3,708
So, we’ll advise a guy who already owns P645 lenses and film cameras to spend ten grand (including a lens or two) for a new Fuji mirrorless camera, instead of about two grand for a 645 D. Ooookay. But it’s a bit like the “forum” member of 1955 asking whether he should consider a Sinar Norma view camera for tripod landscape photography, and being told to get a Speed Graphic instead because it’s more portable, lighter, and has a rangefinder. That they both use 4x5 film is not enough to make them meaningful competitors for the tripod use case. I simply would not want to use a Fuji on a tripod in bright sun (or, in all honesty, particularly in bright sun).

The 645 D will not seem limited to a film photographer. It works well up to at least ISO 400, which is already faster than film that most landscape photographers would consider using in any rollfilm camera. The ability to tolerate very high ISO’s is like magic in many circumstances, but a film photographer committed to tripod use will have already developed the technique to manage that limitation.

The only real limitation is the lack of live view, but I use that on the 645z about once in a hundred photos. Focus confirmation works with any lens on the 645D (or the N and NII, for that matter).

I do not believe it is easy to get the same results using a full-frame camera, though one can get close. 16x20 prints will require 17x enlargement and significant cropping from a 24x36 sensor. The 645D files will be enlarged 12x and will use nearly all of the image. I’ve seen 16x20 prints from D850’s and 5Ds’s that were sharp enough, but they did not have the tonal density and smoothness of prints from the 645D and the Leica S that used the same Kodak sensor.

I think the OP’s plan is a good one—it provides enough image quality to give his experiment with digital a fair test while mitigating the risk of the major technology change.

Rick “format size and shape still counts” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 12-10-2018, 04:52 PM  
Post your medium format photos!
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 13,935
Views: 2,340,876
Both of these with the 645z, 45-85 at 85, f/11.

Rick “from the trail to the Exit Glacier” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 08-10-2018, 10:45 AM  
Guam Photography : Nikon D850 vs Pentax 645z in Studio
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 10
Views: 2,368
What’s funny is that the P645z photos were noticeably better even in the video. They had better color, more range, and a more natural look. He noted the improved color briefly and then complained about moire that wouldn’t be visible on a billboard (and certainly wasn’t in the video I saw).

And then, after exploring only one narrow type of photography, he made his judgment based on versatility.

Rick “sheesh” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 12-18-2018, 09:53 PM  
Post your medium format photos!
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 13,935
Views: 2,340,876
645z, FA300, f/16, 1 second, iso100:

645z, FA35, f/11, 125, iso400:

Rick “arrested decay” Denney
Forum: General Photography 12-20-2018, 09:30 AM  
Why We All Take the Same Travel Photos
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 56
Views: 2,796
This notion of “never been done” bothers me. Nobody has ever made a photo that is identical to another photo. Something will always be different, though not necessarily in a good way.

Finding the best spot to manage foreground and background, or to be “different”, is a matter of technique. But what makes photos unique is not technique (which is a bitter pill for me to swallow, to be honest). It’s about expression.

But, to express something of any relevance, we have to feel something. And to feel something, we have to be open to those feelings. Here’s where the snap shooter runs into problems—they only thing they feel is the need to demonstrate that they were there (which dominates the expressions I see these days), or that they know how to make photos, or they have great equipment (super-telephoto, super-wide, super-format, whatever), or that their kids or pets are cute.

When I’m in the presence of a powerful natural scene, I feel awe, and admiration for the Creator (or, with the constructed scene, the creator), and humility. How to express those feelings? That’s where craft comes in.

Maybe what strikes me is the simply beautiful symmetry, or the sense of height, or simple reverence. Or, maybe the scene brings me joy, or melancholy, or deep outrage. The art is in manipulating craft to deliver those emotions efficiently, without any contradictory clutter. If the scene is powerful enough, we may just need to stay out of its way—any manipulation distracts from that power and undermines awe. Maybe we need to consider what makes it awe-inspiring. Adams describes his decision to use a red filter to darken the sky to emphasize the contrast between the rim-lit Half Dome and the sky, which was the key to the drama of that scene, and his feelings about it.

He describes this as the first photo he made that demonstrated artistic intent.

But we have to have feelings to deliver first, before any amount of technique can deliver them.

If we tune into those relationships, it won’t matter if we stand at the same place as someone else. It won’t even matter if we express the same feeling someone else expressed. That’s a matter of editing, not art-making.

My beef with current photography is that the only feelings considered relevant are cynicism, sadness and outrage. Joy, awe and humility in the presence of dramatic (or simple) beauty seem to be considered untrustworthy, too easily contrived, or too sentimental. They are too much like calendar photos, and the current thinking seems to be that everything about those feelings is unsophisticated and has already been expressed. Artists are expected to be tortured. But those feelings are still important to me, so my photos express them.

But we can also be trapped by technique, relying on specific technical manipulations out of habit rather than purpose. In those cases, we look for camera locations that fit the technical manipulation we want to make, and the divergence from our feelings only increases. The technique becomes a gimmick, and distracting rather than contributory.

Adams complained about sharp photos of fuzzy concepts.

Rick “cataloguing his own weaknesses” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 12-11-2018, 06:41 PM  
Post your medium format photos!
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 13,935
Views: 2,340,876
645z, 200mm FA:

Rick “Root Glacier, Wrangell Mountains” Denney
Forum: General Photography 12-15-2018, 06:29 AM  
Why We All Take the Same Travel Photos
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 56
Views: 2,796
A general reaction: There is not necessarily a distinction between interacting with family and making photographs. My wife and I are both photographers, and when we are making photographs on a trips were are sharing the experience at a deep level.

I also see no distinction between photographing and experiencing a place. On the contrary, photographing a place requires a deeper awareness of it than just standing at the viewpoints and going “wow!”

I think the article is about people who make photos not for the sake of expression but merely to post on Facebook and the like to show their friends that they were there, sort of like mailing postcards. That’s what I call adventure signaling (“look what we did instead of buying things”), which is, of course, every bit as competitive as buying things.

But I think the natural scene is dynamic enough to survive a million still photos without repeating itself.

Rick “who wrote an essay on this topic recently” Denney
Forum: Pentax Medium Format 12-12-2018, 07:51 PM  
Troubleshooting - 2 out of 5 blank rolls from 645NII / 120mm
Posted By rdenney
Replies: 12
Views: 820
Have you dry-fired the shutter without a lens to make sure the mirror is going up in addition to the shutter opening?

Rick “covering the obvious bases” Denney
Search took 0.00 seconds | Showing results 1 to 25 of 120

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:12 PM. | See also:, 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?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]