nicholas_rab1

I'd pay close to a grand, assuming they upped the build quality to have the sealing of the current L series. That's +300 for the IS unit, and +100 for a better build. It really would be one of my most highly used lenses....

Yes, kind of getting off topic, but why has canon not created a 70-200/4 IS? If there was a perfect lens for IS, that would be it (IMO).

I've been watching and waiting myself on this decision. Build, non-rotating front, and ring USM go to the DO. The non-do seems to have better sharpness but also more abberrations than the do does. Obviously the non-do is much cheaper.

 

I think the biggest difference if you don't stare at test charts is going to be form factor and handling. Still trying to decide if it's worth it to me...

Err, I am a dummy, in my example f/8 would be a -2 fill flash, f/11 would be a -1. Did I help confuse things?

Say you are shooting iso 100 film in daylight. Your exposure will be 1/100 at f/16. Take your Vivitar 283, and set the little dial in the front for a correct exposure at f/8. That will give you a -1 fill flash. Set it at f/5.6 for a subtle -2 fill. Since you have a leaf shutter you can go up to 1/500 with the flash as well, just vary fstop and flash accordingly.

 

Remember, flash doesn't care about shutter speed, just your fstop.

 

Easy.

I am using the 1128. I think the 1028 might flex if you try to stop yourself when it is icy, otherwise for spring conditions it will probably work just fine.

 

Seriously though, I debated the 1128 & 1027 for months. I decided to go with the 11 and I have been extremely happy with it. Of course, I probably would be really happy with the 1027 as well. The 1028's smallest legs were just too small for me.

Actually, IMHO, you just bought half of the latest and greatest DSLR. Well, maybe the Hassleblad, but the Contax is pretty sweet too. Now just pick up a nice digiback! Mmm, MF digital, my wallet is shuddering.

Not me! I was responding to that guy. If I keep treating my gear like this though you will see me start complaining. Maybe I should move to a Holga. Either that or a Nikon F3.

No, if it had been destroyed I would be selling it on Ebay as 'mint'

 

:-)

So, just for fun, a little story from the past weekend.

 

I was up backpacking in the Sierra's this weekend, hiking out of

Hetch Hetchy. Our 2nd night in we were camping around 8000 feet,

near a river with snowbanks on both sides. I went out at sunset with

my fuji and a tripod, and was walking on a fairly steep snow

embankment that dropped into the river. The tripod's legs were

extended with the camera on it, but the legs were all together in one

bunch. As you can guess, I slipped and started sliding for the

river. Instinct took over and I started using the tripod and camera

as one would self-arrest with an ice axe (tripod under my body, both

hands with all my weight on one side of the camera, dragging the

other side into the snow to slow me down.)

 

I stopped several feet before the water, shook off the camera, and

continued to use it for the rest of the trip. No problems, just a

slightly bent hanger where one attaches a strap.

 

Love that camera!

I also use a 10D and shot very little film last year. It's not perfect, but is quite a nice camera and gives me the results I am looking for most of the time. I don't see much reason to shoot 35mm any more, but I have been shooting a bit of 6x9. There is no comparison in the amount of data available in a 6x9 frame and a 6(or 8) MP camera. If, however, you don't print larger than 11x17 the differences are pretty negligable. The larger film format just gives you a lot more opportunity to enlarge.

Output would be web and prints on an epson 2200, hopefully up to 13x19. Anything bigger I would send out. Maybe I should go buy both from a local place with a good return policy and pick the better one. Sounds like the 4870 will be the winner though.

I would guess that the vast majority of MF shooters are professional photographers. For them it is a deductable expense, along with film, studio time, etc.

 

Look at yourself, your needs, whether it really *matters* if you shoot medium format. How many pictures do you go over 11x17 on?

 

IMHO putting something like this on a credit card as an non-pro is foolish bordering on the extreme. Get some more film, get a good tripod, max out your 35mm potential. Pick up a yashicamat. Or, if you do have a little cash get a hasselblad off ebay.

Hi,

 

I am looking at getting a scanner for my 6x9 work. If I am never

going to need the larger transparency size of the 4870 will there be

an appreciable difference in scan quality between these two

scanners? I realize the flatbed will not equal a dedicated MF film

scanner, but currently the budget will not allow the Nikon or the

Minolta. If the scan quality is similar, it seems to make sense to

go with the 3170 until funds come in for a dedicated MF film scanner.

 

I looked at the scanners in the shop, and the transparency unit

seemed better designed on the 4870, but I don't know how that works

in practice. I was unfortunately unable to do a test scan.

GSW690III!

 

OK, it's not 6x7, but it is a nice, sharp, light, cheapish wide angle with beautiful huge output.

 

Do you carry your gear far? Up big hills? Consider weight and bulk. If you work next to your car it is no big deal, but the mamiya 6x7 SLR's are big and heavy.

 

TLR's are quite nice too, but you won't get a wide angle. The oft-mentioned yashicamat is really nice at f/11 and smaller where you would be shooting it.

Well, I think the key idea here is be subtle. Your images should not be more than a couple of stops different otherwise there is no way it will look good. Also, just like with a filter, some shots will work well and others will be obvious when you alter them.

 

As far as color correction, you should be shooting RAW (or the nikon equivalent) and using the same white balance. Don't do any levels or other color correction until after you have done your masking. If you are doing all of this and still getting big differences in color I am not positive I can help. Maybe post a res'd down copy of your merged file?

Unfortunately I do not have anything nice for an example, but this technique is what you make of it. I have spent anywhere from 2 minutes to many hours on one image. The workflow I use for a quick and dirty graduated ND look is this:

 

Get both of your images into two layers, then use the gradient tool as a mask with the top layer. Hold the ctrl key in order to make it perfectly horizontal. Depending on how far you pull the gradient you can make a hard or soft transition. This actually gives a similar look to an actual filter, rather than the more tedious select masking which can look more realistic.

 

Make sense?

I can't really help you out with which of those lenses is better. Knowing Contax they are both probably really sweet.

 

My advice is to think more about people shooting skills rather than lenses. What you currently have is more than adaquate for the job. Practice posing, fill flash, get the light off camera, other skills - not equipment. The 80 will be fine for the formals then switch around at the reception. Some wide shots close in, some tele from the sidelines etc.

 

Bring a backup body, 35mm if you have to. Backup flash. Extra film.

 

Sorry if you already know this, and best of luck.

"Important - do not confuse 'digital imaging' with 'photography'. two very different worlds with very different interests and users..."

 

I just don't understand this, why is it different? What is the fundamental difference when I hook a Canon 10D or a 1V to the back of my lens? It certainly doesnt feel much different to me. My interests certainly don't change, and obviously the user doesn't change. Is my work somehow less valid, less "fine art", because it was caught with a sensor rather than film?

"Don't take your 22 mega pixel back to the beach or to the desert if the wind kicks up, or if you get a bizarre phenomenon called RAIN. "

 

That's true, and that is also why I lug my fuji ragefinder backpacking. I could drop that thing in a river, pull it out, and continue shooting. Well, probably. One would hope that as digital progresses - especially with professional gear - that we have better environmental sealing. It never will be straight mechanical however. Interchangeable backs make it easy though. Grab the right tool for the job. Going to the beach in the rain? use the film back.

Heh, always the digital drama.

 

It's photography, whatever you are capturing it on. If for you it is a hobby (which it sounds like), then it really does not matter what format you use. Do what makes you happy and don't worry about it. If film is your thing, great! It will be available for quite a while to come.

 

Oh, and Andre, what kind of comment is that? Why is a digital user "short sighted" and how did you associate a digital user with a ex-hippy conservative? For some uses (especially in the 35mm realm), digital is better and higher quality. For those that are professionals, they just want the best tool to do their job. If you are an "artist" then do whatever you like, just don't shove your ridiculous views down other peoples throats.

Thanks for the feedback all. I have a question about the Hasselblad & digital backs. Having never worked with these, I had the (possibly incorrect) impression that using a digital back with a hassy is kind of a kludge. That is, because there is no communication between the body and the back is the handling different than shooting film? This was the reason I was considering the 645's (contax & mamiya for instance).

 

-Nick

Hi,

 

I am looking for some advice on buying into a medium format system.

I work part time (about 30% of income) as a photographer. I currently

work primarily with 2 10Ds, though I occasionally shoot 4x5 for

personal work.

 

My work consists of primarily event/weddings, but I have been trying

with some success to move into product work. I also do quite a bit

of landscape shooting, both urban and wilderness, though except for

some small print sales this work is for the most part

unpaid/personal. I find it helps with my marketing though.

 

Things I am unhappy about with my 10D primarily have to do with film

choice. I recently shot a wedding that was in direct sunlight, and

did not have the exposure latitude that a good wedding film would

have. That left me with having to underexpose to keep detail in the

dress, making photoshop hard with the tux. With a MF camera &

weddings I would probably shoot the formals & sometimes the ceremony,

leaving the rest for the digital.

 

I have shot medium format in the past, and used to own a Pentax645.

I played around with the 645nII and really enjoyed the interface, but

there does not seem to be any path to digital. That seems pretty

silly to buy into a non digital-ready system at this point.

 

Buying a new body and used lenses, I would like to keep it around

$3500 for a simple 3 lens set ~(45 T/S - hartblei,80,150). Should I

just move on the pentax as a stopgap until something more compelling

is out or I have more money? If I do go with a interchangeable

system that takes digital backs what is the rental situation like for

these?

 

Sorry for my rendition of War and Peace. Thanks for any advice.

1. Because they are fun

2. Because they are different (related to #1)

3. Because sometimes it is the journey and not the destination that

matters (related to #2 & #1)

 

<p>

 

I have one available for borrowing, and it is great fun. Sure, it is

old, slow, and the lens sucks in modern terms, but there is a certain

joy in using it. The pictures seem so much alive, and who cares that

it is only because of what I feel in my heart, nobody is buying them

anyway...

Francisco, creo que el systema de leica es el unico que existe para

usando este tipo de filtro. Como mucho de las cosas Leica, es

demasiado caro.