Any other color landscape photographers still not digital?

[david_senesac]

<p>Given the rise of digital photography and its considerable advantages, many former outdoor color landscape and especially nature photographers have moved to high end DSLRs or MF digital back systems. It is a subject that had been thoroughly discussed a decade ago and am wondering what others think about the situation today? It is a subject where one discusses pros and cons though those arguments change over time so the discussion now in 2013 will be a bit different than it was in 2003. On another board I was recently asked a question about the current availability of color sheet film and processing and related that thanks to resources across the world on the Internet one no longer needs to get by via local resources. That things at the moment are stable though most of us are keeping an anxious eye out as resources continue to diminish.</p>

<p>I added that most view camera users are older folks like this person that already have developed skills for and spent money on our systems that still have the capability of producing the highest level images that can be printed large. That while acknowledging that what is possible is not as broad as with best digital cameras e.g. instant feedback, narrow film latitude constraints, and gear weights etc. Thus can be content to not bother with the expense and technical effort of moving to a new system, cruising along just making images while ignoring the continual commotions and media focus on the digital fronts. If someone gave me an IQ180 or like highest end digital back MF system, yeah I would make the change now, however such equipment is and will remain way beyond the means of the majority of large format users.</p>

<p>My own body of work continues to be a strong statement that one does not have to give up much by being content to remain with traditional gear and I would hope it inspires others. Recent fall leaf trip feature on my website:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.davidsenesac.com/_a-z_evad/Backpacking/MonoFall/monofall_2013.html">http://www.davidsenesac.com/_a-z_evad/Backpacking/MonoFall/monofall_2013.html</a></p>

<p>Work during 2013 is on the bottom 6 gallery rows:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.davidsenesac.com/Gallery_B/gallery_b.html">http://www.davidsenesac.com/Gallery_B/gallery_b.html</a></p>

[western_isles]

<p>David I agree with your sentiments. Recently I sold on my Mamiya 7 kit as I had moved to a digital Nikon but then bought a Bronica 6x6 kit as I hankered after medium format film again and became a bit fed up of estimating what I would get on film. I still shoot film, (E6), but sadly Ektachrome has now gone. It is more enjoyable for me and I am sure others.</p>

<p>I live in Scotland where we are plagued by pretty dire weather which makes landscape work difficult even for digital which, IMHO, consider easier to use than film.</p>

<p>Just had a look at your images via the links and it is impressive stuff, well done. </p>

<p> </p>

[david_senesac]

<p>Thanks Frank,<br /> Guessing you are referring to getting exposures correct. Getting exposures right in dim conditions even using usual spot metering of elements like you noted in cloudy misty Scotland has always been the most difficult nut to crack for view camera users much like on our foggy redwood coast. With digital one can simply review captures instantly and adjust. Note conversely getting exposures correct with reasonably evenly illuminated outdoor landscapes in front lit sunny conditions has always been straightforward.</p>

<p>Something that has been helping me in dim conditions like I relate in my linked feature where I had to work at EV6 to EV8 in shadowed dim skylight to capture the creek images, is to in fact use my Canon G10 in addition to my spot meter to evaluate exposures because it is better at making sense of the overall frame. The compact digital in Av mode can be zoomed to the same frame of whatever LF lens I've mounted and then by setting it in my case to min aperture of f8, after a capture can evaluate the overall frame look, then check image capture information to see what auto shutter speed occurred that then is an EV level I can use at say f32 with whatever EV speed is calculated. A key is to know how one's digital camera tracks exposures with LF across the EV range.</p>

[nbg90455]

<p>I guess the demise of Ektachrome caused me to go all-B&W, rather than go digital, but I would think that for any professional landscape photographer (an I am not!), the decision of LF vs. digital comes down to the need of movements. If you don't need camera movements, you can move to digital, but if you do need movements (esp. tilt, for the classic "small flower in the foreground, and big mountain in the background"), then you really have no choice (I would think...) but to stick with a LF viewcamera coutfit...</p>

[dave_s]

<p>Mike, why not just use T/S lenses?</p>

[nbg90455]

<p>Dave, for the same reason that folks were using view cameras in the pre-digital days: while shift lenses are very useful on 35mm cameras in architectural photography because the plane of focus doesn't change, the shift lenses on 35mm camera really do not allow for enough detail for critical focusing. Even medium format screens aren't big enough. The Rollei 66 was a valiant attempt, and it works okay in some circumstances, but not as well as a 4x5 (or larger) ground glass with a loupe.</p>

 

[jwallphoto]

<p>Hi, David. A friend just loaned me a monorail 4x5 and 210mm lens, and a box of Velvia 100F just arrived in the mail today. I'm going up to Yosemite on Friday to take it for a spin. Haven't shot 4x5 since the early '80s, and even then not for long, but I look forward to taking a crack at it and comparing with my D800E just for fun. It obviously won't be as nimble, but I think it's going to be fun composing on the ground glass and seeing those big chromes come back from the lab.</p>

[david_senesac]

<p>John, so you bought one of those $3k 36mp Nikons! Am impressed. Good luck with the monorail. Would be interesting to see what kind of maximum depth of field you can get on closeups with the D800E versus my G10. Given the DSLR with greatest resolution versus the camera with maximum pixel density.<br>

<br />Yeah have been looking for a chance to visit YV too except don't have much incentive to bother as long as forecasts are sunny fair skies. Tomorrow would be the day as the current storm will still be lingering. Just can't bring myself to make long drives for any forest understory work in sunny contrasty conditions. Might not happen this fall.<br>

<br />Instead Saturday am likely to drive down to Point Lobos where I have worked closeups on Weston Beach 3 times this year already and have more to do. Nov 2 with the new moon on Nov 4 is ideal because the high tide is at 9:42am PDT at a major 5.6 feet then drops to a minus tide late afternoon. Tidal zone work needs to be done on a waning high tide when weather is providing clear sunlight because that provides best saturation on wet subjects with pleasant point source reflections against a blue sky that won't reflect versus clouds.</p>

[robert_taylor9]

<p>I'm one of those "older folks" who has transitioned into digital for my business and sold most of my film camera collection. I still maintain a humble pristine Nikon EM with power winder and several "E" lenses and the mighty Nikon F5 and lenses. My MF cameras have been been sold and I'm in the process of purchasing a "new to me" 4x5. Due to the presents of the Internet the world is more connected so purchasing film and obtaining good processing and scans at this point isn't presenting a problem for me. "older folks" and view cameras (smiles) size matters, if you put a single frame of 35mm in the corner of a 5x4 you can see it's what 13x larger? now start stacking up the sensor sizes from Micro four Thirds through the Nikon and Canon sizes unless using a full frame digital the 35mm film is larger. With todays scanners even lesser cost models they do a great (sort of) job on scanning film. So right now I've had to have my Canon 1Ds Mark II full frame camera modified to compete with the images coming out of the Nikon F5 film camera. Right now in my opinion we the photographers have two mediums that closely parallel in the 35mm format. Of course saying this someone will come along and say a MF will do this and that, and the argument may be true but, slip in a 5x4 or4x5 depending on where you are and all bets are off. Hope this wasn't to wordy but, I believe we are in an age where both digital a film photographers can coexist. To me it's like at home I drive on the left side of the vehicle flew over home rented a car and drove on the right, same thing only different.<br>

Cheers Robert in London CDN </p>

[w_t1]

<p>Robert, what do you mean "having your 1ds2 modified to compete with F5?" Just curious, I have one (1ds2) I bought used this year.</p>

<p>I've shot 4x5 BW forever (well since 1989) and continue to do so, I have also benefited by the rise in digital by purchasing a used hasselbald system which I could never justify as an amateur when it was being sold as new. I think digital and film can co-exist, I know I will continue to use film and my darkroom as long as possible. I missed the boat a long time ago as far as selling film/darkroom equipment and making a modest return. </p>

<p>David, nice work. I used to do some of that solo car camping in my honda civic years back. One advantage of being a short person. </p>

[robert_taylor9]

<p>As stated in my original post "size matters" referring to film format and sensor sizes, that's not the whole picture so to speak. Digital sensors are hobbled with an AA (Anti Alaising) blur filter to combat the possibility of I'll call it a phenomenon called "Moire'". Having the <strong>right lab</strong> remove these filters that are actually a manufactures part of the sensor unleashes the true sharpness and resolution of your camera. Okay this works for me as my Canon IDs Mark II is being used as a digital landscape camera, you don't get something for nothing and this camera is now susceptible to this Moire but, how often do you find a repeating pattern in a landscape? If I do run into a repeating pattern such as a link fence or the louvers on an air-conditioner I can change the angle of view to prevent or lessen this unwanted pattern. Another thing that happens by removing these AA filters is the resulting digital image is substantially larger. My Canon 1Ds Mark II is a 16.6meg camera normally produces 5.2 RAW sunset images modified it jumps to about 21/22meg and a 8.2 meg RAW sunset. A nice moderate scan of Kodak Ektar 100 film will produce a clean image of 9.4 meg. If I push the scan further I begin to see the grain, which is not a problem if you are going to print beyond a 20x30. The modified 1Ds MK II will print clean and smooth to a 20x30 provided good photography principles are used in the image creation.<br>

I feel as if this is off the original topic coming back to it I would say the instant image of digital sways a lot of photographers. That said if you blow a digital highlight it's gone forever, with film there is possibilities of recovery.<br>

Size matters going to a medium format like the Hasselblad and getting a good clean scan from a piece of film that is at least 3.5x larger then 35mm, a digital camera within most "normal" peoples budget just can't compete with the mass amount of information that's on the film.<br>

The reason I use the Nikon F5 for landscapes revolves around its ability to use older manual focus lenses, Nikon's "D" series lenses allowing for colour matrix metering and of course speed.<br>

I'd like to continue on with the idea of film but I'm sure that would require and new thread.<br>

Thanks WT for your interest<br>

B.T.W. modifying the camera isn't a cheap mod runs about $600.00 with postage it's called "Hot Rodding" and the place to get 'er done is http://www.maxmax.com/<br>

<br>

</p>

[john_galuszka]

<p>David,</p>

<p>Keep us posted on what you shot at Point Lobos.</p>

<p>The advantage of living down here in southern Big Sur is that I can wait for optimal conditions before I take out the big cameras, but I am always interested in seeing what others are shooting. I have been waiting several years for flood storm conditions to shoot McWay Falls ... I have shot several "good" photos over the years, but I am still waiting for that spectacular one that I can see in my head.</p>

<p>John</p>

<p>Redwood Gulch</p>

[dan_south]

"while shift lenses are very useful on 35mm cameras in architectural photography because the plane of focus doesn't change, the shift

lenses on 35mm camera really do not allow for enough detail for critical focusing."

 

I'm sorry, but this is not an accurate description of today's DSLRs. The Live View feature permits one to see the image on the camera's LCD screen in real time while composing and focusing. That image can be magnified 10x (more on some bodies). I use this feature frequently for

focusing my TS lenses. It works as well or better than a focusing loupe on a 4x5, and you don't have to worry about fogging the ground

glass with your breath. I'm over fifty, so I need reading glasses to see the screen accurately. But with that small correction, this system works very effectively.

 

If you need an even larger view you can shoot with the camera tethered to a laptop computer. I find this to cumbersome to be practical,

but it's a necessity for some medium format digital systems whose sensors cannot support live view effectively.