Jump to content

jens_g.r._benthien

Members
  • Posts

    453
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

  1. Airbus is using the metric as well as the imperial system, depending on the task. My neighbor is an engineer at Airbus, wings section. Everything is metric there. 120 film is 60 mm wide. I am not talking about the gate or net frame size which is close to a credit card size (54x85mm, same size as German standard business cards).
  2. 6x6 or 6x9 is not a poor metric approximation, it is exactly the film format. Simple as that. The imperial measurement covers only approximately the net area of the image. However, it is not a standard, because i.e. a Plaubel 69W does have a slightly smaller film gate than a Horseman 6x9 back or a Fuji GSW 690 III Professional. Did you ever think about the fact why NASA, the army, etc. use the metric system? It is a lot more precise!
  3. If other people see the manipulated image from mihai and later meet the model in person, they will be shocked. Why not be authentic?
  4. Could be, I don't have the Busch Pressman. A 65 mm from Rodenstock with a recessed lens board might work... shorter focal length lenses have too small image circles.
  5. For a 4x5 it is a 75 mm. However, it will be too wide in most situations, so a 90 mm would fit your plans better. For the 75 mm you need a recessed lens board to use the movements, which I doubt will be available for that camera. Make sure you get a center filter for the lens as well, otherwise your light fall off to the edges will be around 2 f-stops.
  6. I have the cameras and lenses. I am used to handle the equipment. I like film. No client would pay the extra for a digital back. I usually print at 120 x 80 cm for clients (roughly 3 x 4.5 foot) and larger. I don't need batteries except for the light meter. I don't need a laptop and memory cards. There are qualified experts in the lab who develop my film (slide and negative), so I don't have to mess with RAW converters. I can view my film on a light table or against a window without having to boot a computer. I can use my cameras in any climate. The lenses are distortion free. Nothing beats a rangefinder or a ground glass with an optical image. I can make images at night without having to wait for ages to let the camera remove the sensor noise. MF uses only the sweet spot of my LF lenses. My dedicated film scanner delivers breathtaking files. Storage of film is simpler than making copies from one HD to another every year. I can re-scan film if the software improves. I have an original which I can touch, not virtual pixel trash. I want to enjoy my life and profession. Hm, maybe there will be more reasons if I would think more about the topic...
  7. In Europe you can get Haida glass filters with a graduated coating like the large format lens center filters a couple of years ago. Haida also offers filter holders for 100x150 filters, precisely made of aluminium. The Haida filters don't show any color shift, they don't distort, don't scratch. Resin filters are like a magnet for dust (Lee filters i.e.). I use the Haida filter holder and i.e. combine an ND 3.0 and a GND 0.9 filter without any visible color shift. OK, glass filters can break, but resin filters do scratch and attract dust like hell. Soft GND filters are perfect for wide angle lenses, hard GND filters are perfect for tele lenses. Never use a hard GND on a wide angle, unless you want to ruin your image...
  8. <p>I have a lot (around 150) medium format slide films 8 years past expiration date. Fuji Provia 100F, Fuji Astia 100, Fuji Velvia 50 (the old version).<br> They have been stored in normal room temperature (20° C = 68° F), sealed in their original foil. <br> Because I turned to negative film, I didn't remember them until last week. So I took a Provia 100F, loaded my Plaubel 69w with it, made 8 shots and mailed the film next day to the lab. The results are fantastic.<br> However, keep in mind to have them developed as soon as you have exposed them. The longer you wait after exposure, the more color cast you will get. 3 years ago I've made the same test, but left the film in the camera for 3 weeks. No chance to filter the purple color cast which looked like purple clouds over all slides.<br> <img src="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/108865744/forum/scan_160226_0001N.jpg" alt="" /></p>
  9. <p>Both manufacturers have what you want:<br> http://www.hartblei.com/lenses/lens_35mm.htm<br> http://www.zoerk.com</p>
  10. <p>Yes: Until today there are only words. Weird explanations. Hot air.<br> As long as I don't see what Peter Lerman described, there is absolutely no evidence to believe it:</p> <blockquote> <p>I believe the only demonstration of "proof" would be to shoot the same, exact scene with two different lenses.</p> </blockquote> <p>I want a scientific proof. No more, no less.</p>
  11. <p>@Peter</p> <blockquote> <p>I believe the only demonstration of "proof" would be to shoot the same, exact scene with two different lenses.</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> That's exactly what I had asked for. But obviously nobody can or will do it. And as long as I actually don't see a direct comparison, I will stick to my statement and say it's all smoke and puff.</p>
  12. <p>I've made this one with a modern multicoated EBC Fujinon lens. Kodak T-Max, 400 ISO, lab development (I don't develop any film, the people at the lab need some support):</p> <p><img src="https://beefoto.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/scan-090214-0001__02.jpg?w=1008" alt="" /></p> <p>Lots of details in the shadows. Many highlights. Sky. White walls.</p>
  13. <blockquote> <p>Decades of densitometry and optics experience with 'better shadow detail lenses'</p> </blockquote> <p>So there must be hundreds if not thousands of samples somewhere!</p> <p>I just want <strong>ONE SINGLE SAMPLE</strong> and comparison - which obvious nobody can or will present. Not even a link! That's hilarious.</p>
  14. <p>If you guys talk about shadow enhanced lenses, you should at least be able to show some samples.</p> <p>As long as this won't happen, you are chasing a totally transparent unicorn. Smoke and puff.</p> <p>Maybe we should suggest the administrators to add the topic 'esoteric phenomena - no proof required' and have them move this thread to that section.</p>
×
×
  • Create New...