UPDATES Luminous Landscape Home
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10 »
 21 
 on: Today at 07:09:29 PM 
Started by Riaan van Wyk - Last post by BernardLanguillier
Nice essay, beautiful images and I cannot agree more on value of long lenses for distance landscape/zooming on a sub-set of a scene with aesthetically value.

As far as I am concerned, my whole choice of equipment has been driven for years by the need to focus reliably distant objects with top quality long lenses in a reasonably light package. As a side comment, the 70-200 fx.y lenses are good, but the reference IMHO is the Leica R 180mm f2.8 APO that was designed specifically to be shot near infinity. Combine it with stitching and you have a very flexible kit.

I never quite understood why some many photographers keep shooting sea side rock scenes at sunset with ultra wide lenses and ND filters. Wink

Cheers,
Bernard

 22 
 on: Today at 07:08:12 PM 
Started by dreidesq - Last post by Ann JS
Quote
What camera, lens, film, film speed and shooting techniques were being used in those days to make those photos, and how optimally sharp are they?

In my case, I was using Mamiya C330 then RB67 cameras for medium format and a Toyo monorail for 5x4. The photographs which I am currently scanning (using SilverFast and its Negafix module) date from 1972, were shot on Kodak Professional film (either Kodakolor or Vericolor) and were personally processed by me. They have stood up to time amazingly well.

Here are a few examples of the results from the 1972 series:
http://www.fotozones.com/live/index.php/topic/58919-nepal-a-tribute-to-what-once-was/

and these ones (which were shot in 1975)
http://www.fotozones.com/live/index.php/topic/59233-a-birthday-card/


 23 
 on: Today at 07:02:22 PM 
Started by Paul2660 - Last post by yashima
Hi Paul,

Have you seen this test

http://www.digitaltransitions.com/blog/dt-blog/28mm-32mm-test

To me, the 28mm D and 28mm LS are a world apart, I can't believe they are the same optical formula. 28LS is closer to the 32HR than the 28D to the 28LS.

 24 
 on: Today at 07:01:51 PM 
Started by dhdhdh - Last post by NancyP
"On paper" is all we know about the Sony A7R2 at this time. I too am intrigued by the possibility of increased dynamic range of the Sony sensor (sensor new to this model, so one can't generalize from the A72 or A7R) and by higher resolution. On the other hand, a 20 MP consumer camera (6D) is sufficient for my current (amateur) use with small prints, so I tell myself, improve my skills, then consider a specialty camera, Canon or Sony.

 25 
 on: Today at 06:52:20 PM 
Started by chiek - Last post by chiek
The Dmini looks really slim, maybe the adapter plate for the DB is as well. Also, is there a lens board or is the copal attached directly to the front of the camera - maybe it's recessed slightly as well ?

Kapture Group did a similar sort of thing with the TrueWide, but in Nikon F, Canon FD, Leica R, Olympus and Contax mounts.


capture group Truewide covered only 36x36mm sensor. Not 36x48 or 54x40.
But my design covered 37x49mm p45+ sensor with approx 7mm shift. I think it covered 54x40 full sensor.

Base body is fotoman Dmini. But I designed CAD custom cone for copal 3 and modify canon-nex adapter.

Of course it allows infinity focus. It was Very difficult work.

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=93739

making
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=93486

 26 
 on: Today at 06:51:36 PM 
Started by dhdhdh - Last post by BernardLanguillier
Lastly, and this may raise some eye-brows, but it matters, then there is the size of it. The "client perception" that any brand carries. Some don't even look at what you use, most don't care but I get strange and worried looks from clients occasionally when I use my Leica M on some projects, as it is, but it's reassuringly expensive and there is some brand influence there too, and of corse the results are impressive (which is why I choose it and continue to despite all this) and there's no problem, ultimately, but it isn't all that matters unfortunately.

Sticking an Otus 85mm f1.4 in front of any DSLR does seem to fix the size perception problem. Wink

On the initial topic, in my view the P45+ would deliver value if mounted on a view camera, other than that recent top class DSLR win in most areas by a wide margin.

Cheers,
Bernard

 27 
 on: Today at 06:51:21 PM 
Started by Jeff-Grant - Last post by Jeff-Grant
I am contemplating a Leica S. My understanding is that C1 will support the DNG files but as a generic DNG file. I don't know enough about DNG to know whether that is a bad thing, but I'm assuming that it is. I really don't want to start using ACR again. I was never comfortable with the interface or the output, and LR is another place that I don't want to go.

Can anyone tell me whether C1 and the Leica DNG are the way to go. From my Hasselblad days, I remember that I could use LR but it was not as good as using Phocus. I really don't want to spend that much and then have second rate output, or have to use ACR.

 28 
 on: Today at 06:35:03 PM 
Started by Borgefjell - Last post by amolitor
I think "a distinctive appearance or look" is perfectly OK. It's a definition, for sure.

Can I now answer questions about "style"? Let's try out some of the usual questions, and see if the answers become more obvious:

How can I get a distinctive appearance or look for myself?
Can I identify an artist from the distinctive appearance or look in the work?
How does one develop a distinctive appearance or look?
Is a distinctive appearance or look the same as a technique?


 29 
 on: Today at 06:34:04 PM 
Started by Borgefjell - Last post by RSL
How do you come to that conclusion?

A single object is unique, that is not a style.

Are you serious? (about repetition)

You said so yourself.

see previous.

You're the one who said there's a difference between a "style" and a "technique." What's the distinction?

Not in isolation, or do you want to declare any image that is tilted, a Wynogrand style???

I'm not sure. How would you describe a "Winogrand style?"
[/quote]

 30 
 on: Today at 06:16:10 PM 
Started by ndwgolf - Last post by eronald
You get the best sensor from the H5D-50C for landscape, outside portrait and street photography.

However you might want to consider the Phase One XF system for presumably better auto-focus system as well as the waist level option, in addition to the flash sync advantages and technical camera flexibility. A Credo 50/IQ150/IQ250/IQ350 offers the same sensor suitable for these kind of photography that you shoot with available light. A Pentax 645Z will also offer the same sensor but you lose the wide angle options as well as high speed flash sync.

If you mostly shoot inside a studio with carefully setup light then a CCD sensor could be tempting, but personally I don't see much point of heavy investment into CCD in year 2015.

I looked at the Phase AF, it  is not as good, by far, as the Hasselblad's True Focus which is exceptional. See this thread. Of course, the Phase may get better with time, but that remains to be proven.


Edmund

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10 »