gustav1

I think it's silly that so many people are ocmplaining aboout the size of the p67. You don't hear that about rz67 or fuji68. It's large film and it requires a large camera. If you want small then buy a 35mm och a dslr. Personally I like a large camera that is sturdy and robust. The p67 is not all that much larger than a eos1hs with 70-200 but surley the imagequality is.

BUT, since many think that the weight is to much, try it out first and take a momentto figure out how many lenses you want.

I feel secure with one wideangle (55) and a normal (90)..

Take a look at the Pentax 67 forum here at photo.net. Much food in the archive...

 

regards

"The problem for an amateur is that he/she has no reason to take a photograph. -Terence Donovan"

 

Not my quote or my opinion, just found it on the web..

I ask myself these types of questionson a regular basis.. still waiting for an answer. Why do you have to know why to make photos? Do all footballplayers have good reasons to play football? "Because it's fun" should be enough, shouldn't it? Why do we like music? Why do we like the sound of the shutter och the tones in a beautiful black and white photo? I think there are many questions that have the same answer here and they have to do with moods, feelings and teasing of both brainhalfes.

 

Creating, capturing, exploring, mastering of a science, art and feeling. How can anyone NOT photograph?

This is a mail I recently mailed to a famous night photographer, I

would like to discuss it with some of you members of photo.net!

 

 

 

My name is Gustav Lindh and I'm on my fourth year at "Kultur

Samhälle Mediegestaltning" (Culture, Society and Media) at

Linköpings Univeristy (www.liu.se) in Norrköping/Sweden and I'm

writing my masters (1 year) about night photography. I would be

enormously grateful if You would like to answer a few of my

questions about the philosophy about night photography and

photography in general.

 

Here's a couple of lines from the draft of my essay (it will be

written in Swedish and there may be some spellingissues in this

translation, sorry for that):

 

The purpose of the essay is to give a comprehensive report about

night photography as an artform, historical, technical, artistic and

philosofical. This will be done by literary studies, studying of

photographers, photographs and photophilosophers (like Sontag,

Barthes, Flusser etc..) and studies in the field of Visual Culture

(Sturken/Cartwright). Night photography will also be studied as a

representation of the invisible like IR and Röntgen (X-ray).

 

And here is some questions I would like to discuss with you:

 

* Why do you think photographers go out and try to capture the night

in a way that the eye cannot se?

 

* If photography is "painting with light" (from latin), why do a

photographer try to represent something with as little light as

possible?

 

* What do you think about the fourth dimension in night photography?

 

* What questions would you like to be answered in an essay about

night photography?

 

* How do you think that night photography will evolve the next 20

years?

 

* Do you have any tips of litteratur that discusses the philosophy

about night photography?

 

 

 

I would be very grateful if you would have the time to give me your

opinion about these issues.

 

Best regards; Gustav Lindh<div></div>

Well.. I'm using a pentax 67 (mlu, not II) with 90 and 55 and the quality is stunning. Cheap and not really so large. If you want quality you're already using a tripod. An EOS 1ds with 16-35 and 70-200 is about the same weight with all hd-backups etc. It's easy to modify if you find battery drainage to be a problem. Me I'm running my second battery right now (bought the beauty in 2002) so it's not a problem. 2.8 vs 4 can be something you wanna consider and ttl-viewing might also be nice in landscape-photography.

Come join us at the "pentax 67 fourm"!!

up and running! someone made the miracle happen! thanx

I asked the same question in the "site feedback/photo.net is down"-thread. Someone must have a direct-link to the clips..

Anyone have the direct-link to the "video" part? It was one of the "community/gallery/forums/equipment/learn/travel/shop/classifieds" until the crash, and I would like to see all the videos about senior portraiture. thanx!

 

cheers

I've read the quote in a swedish photomagazine, it's not an exact quote but something like that...

Well, I have decided to get rid of my digital point and shoot since it drains my photographic outlet. When taking to much pictures with the p&s I don't feel the same urge to make "real" photos. I have captured nealty 15000 images with my p&s and they don't nearly have the same feeling in them as the photos from a film-camera. Digital is great, but maybe not for all of us. B&W is still best performed with film and as salgado said; to work with photos in a computer is like watching a pornofilm, to work in a real darkroom is like having sex with a woman. hehe, funny guy.

 

/gustav from sweden

Recently took my gear to Tunisia (from Sweden). I have 67 +55 +90. Used the inner compartment of my loweP rover light in a cheap smaller backpack for a lighter apperance. Boy was that a misstake. Got severe neckproblems which tock weeks to get over. Now I use the whole roverlight even though I don't use the entire backpack. Really like the 6x6-sqare and kenna/horne-imagiry so a hassleswitch is maybe not far away. I recently modified the view och the ttl by cutting a piece of paper and placing between the gg of the 6x7 for composing and then cropping i the darkroom. well well. a mask in the back and lesser framespace would be nice.<div></div>

yes, patience is not a problem. í ¨ave the fastest lens in my system (2,8) but pentax 67 internal meter is not nearly enough sensitive. my hand held meter goes to -2 ev. Should I buy a more senitive meter or estimate exposures darker than that?

well, call it Kenna-style if you must :),Ive tried digicam but my pentax optio s only takes images down to ev3. I wonder about what meters you are using for these types of shots.

cheers

Hello

 

I've been trying to do some nightphotography and need some help with some exposure measurement-issues. I have searched the forum and thenocturnes but need some more advice:

 

(((

first my equipment, Pentax 67 (modified, no batterydrain), minolta flashmeter IV (-2 ev incident) with 10 degrees spot measure acessory, tables of film reciprocity (tmax100 is my film of choice).

)))

 

1. I have some trouble to measure EV0 to EV-6, my meter is not powerful enough (I have tried to fool it by changing iso to 6400 and so on).

Should I by a different meter?

which one is best for night photography?

 

2. should I learn to estimate exposures and not rely on meters for -ev exposures?

 

3. I only have 10degrees spot-measurement, will it be enough for these types of photography? (I only use 67mf-lenses 55mm and 90mm)?

 

please fill me in! thanks.. /gustav from scandinavia

Okey so the test may not be suited for digital cameras with small sensors, but how about 6x7? Do I use 90 mm as 90 mm or as 43 mm (135 film standard lens)?

Hello!<br>

<br>

Performing some lens-testing at home and I wonder if the distance

from film (ccd) to chart really should be 50x focal length on digital

cameras or if I shold use the angle of view instead? EXAMPLE;<br>

<br>

If I want to measure the lp/mm of my Optio S:<br>

<br>

<b>[Real Focal length]</b><br>

ccd size is 7mm (1/2,5", pythagoras; sqrt(5,6^2 + 4,2^2)=7mm).<br>

wideangle on the camera is 5,8 mm (35mm in 135mm is on Optio S;

5,8mm).<br>

The distance here is 50 x 5,8 mm = 29 cm (approx 11,4").<br>

<br>

<br>

<b>[135mm focal length or angle of view]<br></b>

5,8mm in Optio S is 35 mm in 135mm;<br>

50 x 35 mm = 1,75 meter (approx 67").<br>

<br>

<br>

<br>

Which should I use? Same applies to when I want to test my 6x7-system

where the normal focallength is 90 mm (43 mm in 135 format).<br>

I will be using Norman Korens 2003 chart:

http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF5.html<br>

<br>

<br>

So the question is, cameras real focal length (5,8 mm) or it's 135mm

converted focallength (35mm) when multiplied by 50 to measure lp/mm?

<br>

I don't think anything will be gained by doing this. Maybe if your scanner is a flatbed and you want a larger area to scan but send your 35mm out for a drumscan. If you shoot 35mm you will only get 35mm results, the 35mm_to_4x5_process does not render extra information to the image.

my 2 cents..

I?ve done quite a bit of work with the new DSRLs and they are great as a substitute for aps or 35mm work but the feel in the images is no where near the 6x7 format. No matter how you put it the dsrl uses to short focal-lengths to produced suggestive and romantic images. Dsrl is very inexpensive and does what it does but I can't see how anybody can staty that they will replace medium format. Maybe Digital backs will in the future, but yet they are ridiculassly expensive and if you're not a pro, don't even bother contaplating them.

 

Medium format will be around for a long time. If the filmcompanys discontinue the 120film there will always be others. Mamiya released an updated rzII a couple of months ago, they will see to it that you will be able to load it for quite some time. Happy shooting!

No, the older 6x7 still needs battery for holding the shutter and for metering if you have that prism. You can however have your 67 modified to not require batteries but that's mostly for astrophotogs.

For astro there is also this: http://www.sciencecenter.net/hutech/pentax/battelim.htm

 

 

But I've found out that the battery holds for such a long time it's not economical to have the camera rebuilt unless you really have to..

2cents only...

Vuescan can be used with the 3170, atleast 8.1.14. Works great and colorcorrection is easy and correct.

Try these for starters:

 

http://medfmt.8k.com/

and

http://www.fujirangefinder.com/

 

And of course the lovely site our at right now!

Having done some tests with emultion down/up and directly on glass or on holder, here is my results;

 

All on 3200 dpi in vuescan, these were the candidats:

 

1. holder, emultion up (glossy side facing scanner-head), slide 48bit

2. holder, emultion up, bw 16bit

3. holder, emultion down, bw 16bit

4. directly on glass, emultion down, 16bit grey

 

Winner is number 2 which is what the manual says. Scaning in slide mode didn't add any extra information with my tests.

 

When I did the dpi-test I found out that 3200 vs 1600 is practicaly the same in detail but the 1600 uprezzed to 3200 in bicupic ps cs didn

t look good.

 

 

My conclusion to all these tests:

Scan with holder, 16bit bw, emultion facing up, 3200 dpi when going really large and 1600 dpi under normal circumstances.

Also, a related question:

 

I've seen pages suggesting that you get sharper any more grainless images by scaning without the holder and directly on the scanner glass (emo side down). What do you think about that? Do you really get more info out of the neg by scanning as slide?

 

Side ref.:

 

http://www.virtualtraveller.org/epson2450.htm

>I always scan on "original size" and scale the scan later to suit.

 

 

So there are some who scan att 3200 and save files for future use. The economics of two scans per cd (or three scans per gig) may be overkill.

 

Anyway, I compared 1600 ppi with 2400 ppi, could not see any more useful data in the larger one. Uprezing 1600 to 2400 gave some pixelation in 200% ratio so for large printing I consider doing rescanning at max rez.

I just did some color scanning and filesize is approx 360 megg which is a bit large. Am I gaining anything by scanning large and dowres to 2400 dpi versus scanning directly at 2400 dpi?