adamjohnson

October 18, 2013

Greenfield, Minnesota. Taken in August, processed in October. Pentax 67, Pentax 67 SMC 200mm F4, Fuji Velvia RVP 50 <img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7365/10343193105_f5b53d3815_c.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="631" />

June 11, 2013

Buy from KEH and the lens will have been inspected and guaranteed to function. When it comes to Mamiya M645 lenses most say buy the N version, but I had a preference for their C version lenses. The images below were taken with a lens that KEH rated as EX. Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8, Fuji Velvia RVP 50 <img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8449/8053073454_ef21d6d5bc_c.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="590" /> Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8, Fuji Velvia RVP 50 <img src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2567/4101823752_aa3dac812c_o.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="590" /> Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8, Fuji Velvia RVP 50 <img src="http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2672/4101824550_d6cf38f71a_o.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="601" />

November 7, 2012

It could violate Derivative Works under copyright law, depending on how similar the images are and what you do with those images. The legal standard for copyright violation is substantial similarity. If you were to recreate the scene to the extent that the average person could mistake it for a previously created image, you would be in violation of copyright. One of Ansel Adams' most recognizable photos is "Moonrise." If you were to go to Hernandez, NM under identical meteorological conditions and photograph the moonrise from the exact spot he stood to create this image, using a lens with the same focal length, then publish those images yourself, would you be in violation of his copyright? If your image has substantial similarity, and if you publish the image, then the answer is yes. Simply recreating the scene does not violate copyright. Publishing an image that has substantial similarity to a previously created work does.

November 1, 2012

Those are my images linked from Flickr. The first was scanned with an Epson V500 before I knew much about scanning or photo editing, but it's had 5000+ views so it remains... The second was scanned with an Imacon 646, with only Levels and Hue adjustments, and it's a fair representation of the original slide.

There are many tutorials out there about simulating Velvia, but it's not the same. Velvia is very unique, which is why many of us are still shooting it. I'll also say though that there are plenty of amazing images that were NOT captured on Velvia so I wouldn't worry too much about it in the end. Good light matters much more than the camera or film used to capture the scene.

October 27, 2012

That's a fine image. In fact, you have many fine images and a quick google image search suggests that you are not the only one using them to promote a Wedding Photography Business. If it's registered with the United States Copyright Office, you should contact an attorney. If it's not registered, you'll find that trying to police the internet is exhausting and without much, if any, financial rewards.

Since you are asking what to do in this situation, I'm going to assume the image is not registered. Without copyright registration you do not have a lot of leverage, but you can try a DMCA takedown notice or even give them a call and suggest that they remove the image from their website.

Copyright infringement is rampant on the internet. Best practice is to routinely register your images with the US Copyright Office; apply a watermark; upload only small images; and add copyright and contact information to the metadata of your digital files. Most important is that you register your images with the US Copyright Office. This step gives you A LOT of leverage when an infringement occurs.

October 26, 2012

Chaska Minnesota

Pentax 67 Pentax SMC 67 45mm f/4 Fuji Velvia RVP 50 Singh Ray 3-Stop Reverse GND & Lee 4x4 81A

September 20, 2011

Rather than looking at it as simply an expensive support system, you should instead consider how the quality of the equipment you use allows you to create what you envision without being distracted by the shortcomings of your equipment. Gitzo and Really Right Stuff don't just make expensive photography equipment. They make tools of exceptional quality that, in turn, make your life easier.

The first time I was out with my Gitzo G1325 and RRS BH-55, I was absolutely amazed by how effortless it was to set up and shoot the scene - and it's been the same ever since. If money is concern (and when is it not?), you can always buy used.

August 25, 2011

I think that as people have become accustomed to the look of digital, film has began to stand out as unique in look and feel. Is digital technically better: Yes, but I really don't care... I have been considering a digital SLR for years, but have yet to find a digital image that matches the color palette and warmth of Velvia RVP 50, which is why I still successfully shoot film and love doing so. Not only do I prefer the look and feel of film, but I absolutely LOVE the process! Digital cameras have no life in them, it's just a computer. And although a film camera is no more technically alive (in a living, breathing sense), my Pentax 67 is entirely manual, and it produces this exhilarating clunk every time I release the shutter. There is this process that is so much a part of film, and digital simply does not offer as much personal interaction between photographer and tool. Yes, digital does have its place in the [mostly commercial] world. But film is so much more alive. As a testament to film: I heard a couple of weeks ago that tpt (Twin Cities Public Television) was looking for photographs of Minnesota for a book. Being a Minnesota photographer, I felt a need to find out whether or not they'd want my contribution and initially submitted 7 photos. Out of 5,000 photos submitted in the first 2 weeks, 30 photos were showcased and 4 of those chosen were mine - all shot with film: <a href="http://www.captureminnesota.com/showcases/quick-hits-1">Capture Minnesota</a>. 3 of the images were captured with a Mamiya M645 Pro, and 1 with a Pentax 67. The key ingredient was light, but film still made the images what they are. There is something about film that moves people. I have free will, and I still choose film.

Adam Johnson Minneapolis, Minnesota

August 5, 2011

The V500 won't resolve as much detail as say a Nikon Coolscan 9000 or a drum scanner. But it will do the job for images on the internet, and even up to 16x20 if you practice good technique while capturing the image.

The thing that I always get hung up on about my V500 is that it's just not that sharp at 100% crop. When I look at my slides on the light table, I absolutely hate how fuzzy the scan is by comparison - and I've tried every scanning technique I could find or come up with on my own. Because quality dedicated film scanners have vanished from the market, I pay for drum scans when quality and large prints are paramount. For everything else the V500 is a great scanner, especially for the price. I think you'd be amazed by what a $180 scanner is capable of. Captured with: Pentax 67 Pentax 67 SMC 45mm 4 Seconds @ f/22 with Provia 100F

Epson V500: <img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4121/4798775694_d56d092286_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="535" />

Hasselblad Drum Scanner: <img src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5126/5368990653_4264f55a63_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="512" />

August 2, 2011

Singh-Ray, Lee, and Hitech are all quality filters. Your P-Series filters and holder will work as long as you don't have to use an additional filter, like an 81A warming filter. I used my P-Series filter with my 35mm & 45mm Mamiya M645 lenses and only had vignetting when I used a screw-on filter in conjuction. When I moved onto 6x7 I began using a Lee Foundation System. But I still carried my P-Series Singh-Ray filters and, out of necessity, discovered they work just as well handheld. Filter holders are a convenience, but they are not very necessary, even on long exposures. I have plenty of fine images that were captured while holding the filter in front of the lens. I like having a filter holder. But I've also found that if I need to set up quickly, they are not necessary. The photo below was captured while holding the filter in front of the lens. I'd say just use what you have and not worry too much about the holder. God gave us thumbs for a reason. Pentax 67 Pentax 67 SMC 200mm Lens Hitech 2-Stop Hard GND 8 Seconds @ f/5.6 <img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4148/4991991867_6f07364a9e_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="506" />

July 27, 2011

Fog has been a bit of a rarity for me because it usually means I've been awake all night. But each time I've encountered it I was quite pleased to have taken the time to capture it on film.

After shooting just about every film out there, it's Velvia RVP 50 that I prefer. Velvia is a tough film master, so you have to shoot quite a lot of it while paying attention to the process and results before you learn how it reacts to different lighting and color situations. Provia 100F on the other hand has similar colors; is much more forgiving in terms of latitude; and doesn't require exposure compensation.

If you're really concerned about exposure, I'd suggest you get yourself a gray card and learn the Zone System. If you can determine Zone 5 and expose it properly, everything else will fall into place as long as the shadows and highlights are not beyond what the film is capable of recording in terms of latitude. There are of course some exceptions, but you learn what to expect the more you shoot.

Warming Filters will also help a lot in low light situations. For light fog, an 81A is probably enough. If it's a thick, heavy fog and the sun cannot break through, then an 81B would probably be necessary.

June 14, 2011

When I began to appreciate photography a few years ago (before digital could compete with film), I read that pros used Velvia 50 slide film for its vivid, dreamlike colors. What I found to be the most appealing aspect of slide film though, is the adage of WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get). If you shoot slides, the labs can't manipulate your shots with standard processing- you either got it or you didn't. There is so little latitude with slide film that your results are entirely dependent upon your own understanding of light and film. This makes it very rewarding when you get everything right. For me: Velvia RVP 50 is where it's at. I only trust it up to 4-4.5 stops, but when shooting at sunrise and sunset, grads tame the sky very well and bring everything within the limits of the film - you just have to be able to read the light. If you're serious about slide film, I'd suggest you study "The Zone System," buy a spot meter, and use a gray card. With the spot meter, you can determine exactly how many stops you'll need, and a gray card will tell you what falls into Zone 5. Once you know Zone 5, it's relatively simple to manipulate the light with grads and make sure everything important falls within those 4-4.5 stops. I shoot landscapes in Minnesota. You can see many examples of the colors of Velvia RVP 50 on my website: http://AjRagno.Zenfolio.com/

May 30, 2011

As a couple of others have mentioned already: I think that a medium format camera may be a bit much. I understand where your heart is (because I too LOVE photography, and I've been here myself). But a medium format camera system is not a simple mechanism, and it takes a lot of heart and dedication to learn and love the process involved.

I had a long-time girlfriend who loved photography, and she had the eye as much as anyone ever has. I knew, however, that she didn't have the patience necessary to learn the process of film, light, and manually focusing so I gave her an advanced point n' shoot digital camera. She ended taking photos that I wish I had taken! Her photos were very impressive, they really were... But it was because all she had to do was point n' shoot, without thinking of anything beyond what she saw at that moment. If I gave her anything more complicated and involved, it would have stayed at home and there would have been no photos at all.

If she really wanted a medium format film camera, I expect she'd research it and buy what she wants on her own. As a gift though, give her something simple and useful, and you'll both be happy. There are some excellent point n' shoot cameras out there that to the untamed eye will match the quality of even the most expensive and complicated camera system.

May 27, 2011

Could it be that you're not using it right? Though Ken Rockwell is perhaps the most annoyingly self-righteous photographer out there, his article on "Selecting the Sharpest Aperture" is worthwhile reading: <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/focus.htm">http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/focus.htm</a> I've NEVER had a single objection about the sharpness of my C version lenses. A general rule is to use your distance scales and add an extra stop or two because distance scales tend to be optmistic. You'll learn what the lense capable of in terms of sharpness and focus after a few rolls - and don't fear f/22 if that's what the scene calls for either. You can also focus on the most important part of the scene and then open up a couple of stops. This will give the illusion of everything being in focus. You can find plenty of sharp images on my website, and all of the M645 images were taken with Mamiya-Sekor C lenses: <a href="http://ajragno.zenfolio.com/">http://AjRagno.Zenfolio.com/</a> 45mm Mamiya-Sekor C @ f/16 with Velvia RVP 50: <img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2801/4232500167_5f92736b6b_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="503" />

45mm Mamiya-Sekor C @ f/16 with Velvia RVP 50: <img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2567/4101823752_67a96ce68f_z.jpg?zz=1" alt="" width="640" height="472" />

March 14, 2011

I can't offer much technical advice in cleaning because I never saw the point of bothering with repairs when the Mamiya-Sekor C lenses were so inexpensive. If you do destroy it during the cleaning process, just buy another. I think I paid $80 for my 200mm f/4 and loved the images it captured. I will say though that every single image I adore that came with the 200mm was shot at f/4. It was beautiful wide open, but lacking at anything beyond. The 2nd image was shot a few minutes after it had rolled off a rock and into the Whitewater River in Southeastern Minnesota.

"Zippel Bay State Park"

"Whitewater State Park"

February 28, 2011

It was only a year ago that I couldn't justify a $2000 dedicated film scanner so I purchased an Epson V500 instead and decided to use a lab for $25 drum scans of the images I'd sold. A year later and I can now justify a $2000 dedicated film scanner but the Nikon 9000 ED no longer costs $2000 and there's no comparable alternative. I find it a real shame that Nikon stopped producing 9000 ED because it's the scanner that all of us want and would happily buy if it were available at that 2009 price. Too bad for us and too bad for Nikon that they deciced to end production. If you're looking at an 800x600 image on the Internet, there is very little difference between a $100 Epson V500 scan and $20,000 drum scan. When it comes to the print however there is a vey noticeable difference in both detail and sharpness, so why spend an extra $400 on an Epson V700 when the V500 can do just as much in all practicality? If you wants to show your film images on the internet, go cheap. It you want prints however, flatbeds simply do not capture the detail and sharpness that you see on a light table. When I began reading this discussion, I again debated in my head, "should I buy an Epson V700?" But this discussion is nothing new... There is no flatbed that compares to the 9000 ED in terms of sharpness and detail. If you can't do it right, don't do it at all. I'm waiting for a dedicated film scanner that will equal the Nikon 9000 ED. Until that time comes, I will use my V500 for the Internet and drum scans for prints.

February 22, 2011

645 vs 6x7 is a bit misleading. It's actually 4.5x6 vs 6x7 - and side-by-side the 645 looks puny when compared to the 6x7. The 6x7 slide/negative is 50% larger, noticeably sharper, and more detailed than that of 645. I used a Mamiya M645 Pro for a year and it was an excellent learning tool. But the quality of a 6x7 is well beyond that of the 645, and well worth the extra cost and weight.

I found the 645 format annoying when I went to print because you lose so much on the long end. 6x7 on the other hand is considered the "ideal format" because no cropping is required with standand-sized prints - The entire image fits.

If you're debating 645 vs 6x7, I would move right up to the 6x7 and be done with it. I personally chose the Pentax 67 over the RB/RZ67 because I use Velvia 50 95% of the time. I didn't need interchangeable backs, wanted a camera that was build like a tank, easy to pack, and could be replaced in a moment if dropped or stolen.

If you do buy from KEH (which I would recommend), and money is a concern, choose EX+ for the body and Bargain for the lenses. You can expect a body that is mechanicaly perfect and looks new, plus lenses that function perfectly even if they may have a few dings on the body.

If you do decide on Pentax 67, beware that a sturdy tripod and head are required to tame that massive shutter.

January 28, 2011

August 9, 2010

<img

src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2690/4355812326_2bf23acc1d_z.jpg?

zz=1"</a>

August 9, 2010

<img

src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1078/4726282791_bf84ef065f_z.jpg"</a>

April 21, 2010

Christoph is correct. "C," "S," & "N" refer to age and lens coatings. The "C" versions are the originals. "S" versions had the same metal (heavy) housing as the "C" versions, but the updated lens coatings you'll find on newest "N" versions.

I think you need to consider your film choice and shooting style when choosing which versions to purchase though. I shoot Velvia, always use a tripod and small apertures, and color is paramount to me. I've found that I much prefer the "C" versions for their stabalizing weight and warmer colors. If you prefer to shoot handheld and wide open, the "N" versions have more contrast and weigh noticeably less.

I know the "C" version takes 77mm filters. I believe the "S" and "N" versions are 67mm.

Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8 1 second @ f/16 Velvia 50

March 24, 2010

After receiving lenses with oily blades and a non-working camera, I've learned to stay away from eBay for camera related purchases. With stores (even online stores), you get a simple return policy; a real warranty; and accountability. If KEH had poor business practices, you'd hear about it on this site. I think it's definitely worth your while to wait until what you're looking for shows up on a retail site - and I can't praise KEH enough. I'm sure you'll be very satisfied if you choose to purchase from them.

March 23, 2010

I have a 67 now and I have also used a 67ii, and I think that you need to consider how you plan to use the camera, as they will both produce the same end results. The 67ii is more refined, has a better feel to it with the right hand grip, and I understand the metered prism is excellent. But I think the 67 is a more solid camera overall and doesn't seem to have as many complaints about the cocking lever locking up. For me, the 67 turned out to be more suitable to my needs. The only things I truly miss about the 67ii are the self-timer and multiple exposure options. Other than that, I'm very pleased with the 67.

As for where to buy... National Camera's medium format shop is only a couple miles from my house, but I bought my P67 from KEH. When my 67ii died, I called NCE looking for a replacement, but they said they didn't have a 67ii or a clean 67 on hand so I turned to KEH instead.

I'll say that I can walk into NCE and personally check on my camera equipment before purchasing. But I still feel more comfortable dealing with KEH in the end. Their prices are very low and their Ex+ rated equipment has always appeared new to me when it arrived. With KEH, I know that what I am going to get will be in better condition than expected, and their sales reps are very helpful, actually some of the best I've ever dealt with in any business. If you pick up the phone and call, I'm sure they could tell you the serial # of the item listed on their website. Though I would trust their ratings more than the age of the equipment. The P67 I got from KEH was listed as Ex+, but it looked to me like it just came out of the box. The serial # is: 4187196.

I hope you find what you're looking for and get what you need. The Pentax 67 turned out to be just what I've always wanted in a medium format camera system.

February 16, 2010

I've come to view my camera as a passport of sorts. Though I've always loved the quiet of the countryside and taken the time to notice what's around me, with a camera I'm no longer just an observer - it's more on the record. Not only do I notice more, but anyone who sees me allows me to do my thing because they can instantly see that I'm a photographer, with a purpose, and not a simple trespasser.

There is no place I would rather be than in the countryside, catching a sunset...

January 28, 2010

<div>

00Vcge-214817684.jpg.0ef8fd957ed2096650f18bd46ec06fac.jpg

</div>

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by adamjohnson