Need pro advice on K5II - and lenses.

[jake_m]

<p>Hi Pros,<br>

As a fine artist ( drawing and sculpture ) I shoot my own work with varied success. At the moment I use a Mamiya 645 proTL with a selection of lenses - my favorites being the 50mm shift and the 120mm macro. For flat art I use the 80mm macro.<br>

Currently I'm putting together a copy-stand setup with alien bees strobes to shoot flat art. Although I have a Pentax K100d just to help me get the settings dialed in - I'm starting to think that it would be nice to just shoot with a tethered DSLR yet get the same quality as the medium format film. <br>

Question is: a) should I stick with what I have, or - b) could I get very similar results with a k5ii body and a macro lens?(would need a macro for flat art and a lens for shooting 3d pieces averaging 4'X4').<br>

I see k5ii bodies for around $500. Not sure about lenses - because I don't know which one(s) would suit my purposes best.<br>

Would appreciate lens suggestions. sigma ex dg or pentax etc.<br>

Thank you.</p>

<p> </p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I imagine good results are possible. There are good macro lenses available (DA35/2.8 Limited, D-FA50/2.8, D-FA100/2.8, plus Sigma and Tamron are excellent -- really, nobody makes bad macro lenses). I imagine a 50mm macro would probably be closest to your 120 macro in usage/field of view -- essentially short telephoto. If you want macro lenses a little longer, Tamron offers 60mm and Sigma 70mm.</p>

<p>If you want optical tilt or shift -- (especially for wide-angle like your Mamiya 50mm), Pentax may not be your best choice, though possibly what you actually need in this regard can be corrected digitally?</p>

<p>I also imagine that other systems have stronger tethering solutions in terms of live controlling of the camera and instant review via tablet or computer. This said, photographically the K-5ii and macro lenses remain very capable of excellent optical results in high quality digital files.</p>

[trw]

<p>Not knowing how you're scanning your film or what you're doing with the files afterwards one can not speculate if you'd get similar results with any sub-mf dSLR as mf film.<br>

Properly composed, exposed, developed, scanned, and processed 645 slides should give mind-blowingly better images but there is a lot of room for error and if you're not reproducing them large (where large depends upon the limits of the specific dSLR you're comparing) it may not be better enough to make a difference.<br>

The dSLR will have more depth of field, which will be important when shooting sculpture. It will also be a much easier and cheaper workflow.</p>

<p>I have shot fused glass and flat art with my k5 and my mamiya c220. The fused glass images are good for catalogueing and web publication; the flat art images have been used for reproduction up to 16x20 giclee prints.</p>

<p>The 6x6 slides look amazing on the lightbox but by the time I have them scanned with my workflow they are not substantially better; there is just not that much fine detail to see in human-created art.</p>

<p> For landscape images medium format slides absolutely blow away any dSLR I have tried - if it is being projected or printed large. Human created art just does not have enough detail for it to make a difference. </p>

 

[jake_m]

<p>Thank you guys for the responses. I should have mentioned that I have a Nikon Coolscan 8000 with glass holder for scanning. For film: Provia 100f. <br>

I don't expect to make large reproductions - just presentation and possibly publication.<br>

Based on what your saying - I may just work with what I have for now. </p>

<p> </p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Since you already have a DSLR I imagine you can make an attempt to do a side-by-side compare the 'presentation and possibly publication' you're getting from your Coolscan 8000 with what you can accomplish with even your modest 6mp K100D + whatever lens (18-55 kit?) you have now. It is safe to assume the digital output can be further improved with a 16- or 24-megapixel body and higher quality lens but you may find that your results are already pretty usable. You might even find it handy as a preview of what you are doing with your medium format film workflow.</p>

<p>If you're at the point where you think your existing lens is holding you back you could try something inexpensive like a used manual focus Pentax-M50 f/4 which often sell in the $50-70 range. In addition to improved sensor resolution and dynamic range, another benefit of more recent bodies is precise live view focusing.</p>

[jake_m]

<p>Thank you Andrew. Sounds like a good approach. Actually I also have a Pentax LX for which I have several original SMC lenses. 50 macro, 50 1.4, 28 2.8. At one point I swapped out the focus screen in the k100d for manual focus. I may have gotten the wrong type screen ( from ebay ) - because it didn't work well at all. I simply could not get a sharp shot with it. So I just put the AF screen back to use with ( you guessed it ) - the 18-55 kit lens. That said - a few shots worked out by chance and the bokeh with the older glass is sure nice. Likely I'll put higher end digital on ice for now until I hit the walls with what i have. </p>

 

[snik75]

<p>A K100d and a 50mm macro lens can produce very nice results. Maybe not to match MF slide film, and I don't think you can tether that camera, but very nice results nonetheless.</p>

[jake_m]

<p>Hi Nick, sorry for the late reply. I already have an original smc 50mm pentax macro. However, as mentioned, I tried swapping out the focus screen for manual focus with poor results. Is there a particular focus screen ( brand ) that might work? Thank you.</p>

 

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I'm not an expert on this but you may need shims on your replacement focus screen, thickness based on trial and error to make it more accurate. I don't think K100D was designed for user-replaceable focus screens so this may make it less plug-n-play than if it was?</p>