miles_hecker

Any of the 3 high-end Digital SLRs, D2X,1DS or 1DSmk2 will exceed the quality of any 35mm scan with Provia 100F or Velvia at Super A3 print size. In fact they will equal drum scanned 645 film with proper workflow technique up to 20"x24" size. I have shot 35mm, 645 and a 1DS personally and sell landscape prints of this size with commercial success. See some of the images I have on this site or at www.wyofoto.com for a sample. Hope this helps.

I own a used 1DS, my wife has a 20D.

I print landscapes on a Epson 2200 & 7600.

I also have a Pentax 645N to compare to.

 

 

The 20D will make very nice detailed prints at 13x19 max.

It's sensor and electronics are way better than the D60/10D.

I found the D60/10D unacceptable for landscape beyond 8x12.

 

 

The 1DS will go to 20x30 max with no problem.

It is lightyears in tonality above and real resolution beyond the 10d/20d/d70/s2. Not even in the same league. The relative number of pixels is not indicative of the overall quality!!!

 

I've compared them all with real prints.

 

The 1DS is equal to a 645 drum scan in real resolution and

can be better in sky tonalities.

 

So based on your needs, I'd think the 20D is good for a modest $$ and the 1DS a bargain for bigger prints IF you don't have to sell the house to get it.

 

Good luck..<div></div>

The 70-200 f/4 Canon lens is light and an exceptionally sharp lens.

See attached photo. It does not come with a tripod collar, but you can purchase one for about $100. If you intend to make prints no bigger than 11"x14" either camera will work well. The 20D has more pixels, less noise and IMO is capable of much bigger prints, 13"x19" and even bigger than the D70. It's sensor and electronics are 1 generation ahead of the D70 and it shows in large photos. It can also shoot 5 frames/sec versus 3 for the D70. This could make a difference if you shoot fast moving subects. If you don't this won't matter. Try each camera if you can to see if you like the feel and viewfinder. Good luck!<div></div>

Try the non-autofocus Pentax 645. An ex+ body can be had at KEH for $550. A used non-autofocus 45-85mm lens can be had for $600. This will give you the equivalent of a 28-52mm on a 35mm SLR. Stopped down to f8/f11 this lens is superb. I routinely make digital 18"x24" prints. Under ideal conditions I can get an excellent 22"x30" print. Total cost is less than your 10D body.

 

See: http://www.photo.net/photo/650923&size=lg

 

This shot is gorgeous printed at 20"x30".

No, it is inferior!

 

Blooming is a big problem.

Some people have been blaming the lenses, but teeny tiny pixels

spill their electrons at high contrast light dark boundaries.

Noise at ISO's higher than 50-64 is another problem.

 

If tiny pixels were first class we'd have 15MP in a 22mm x 15 mm sensor and Canon wouldn't be selling the 1DS for $7000.

I use both the 35mm and 45-85 mm zoom Pentax 645 lenses for landscape work. The 35mm and 45-65mm range of the zoom are capabable of producing tack sharp 24"x30" enlargements given proper techniques, stopping down to f8 or greater, proper tripod use etc. The 75-85mm range is very good but not as sharp. I find 20"x24" are no problem though. Color rendition is balanced and superb. The combination will give you coverage across the 20-52mm range in 35mm equivalnet terms.

 

See http://www.photo.net/photo/650923

or http://www.photo.net/photo/1837518&size=lg

 

for examples.

Hi all. I was lucky enough to be one of many to test Velvia 100F for Fuji. I feel it is much finer and softer grained than Velvia 50. It is also not as contrasty in the shadows and the greens while heavily saturated are much more realisitic. Nick Rains published some side by side scans at

 

http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/velvia100f.shtml

 

I talked to Nick and agree with him that it can produce images that are superior to Velvia 50 when scanned. It also has no reciprocity failure out to exposure times of 2 minutes. This is way better the Velvia 50!

See http://www.photo.net/photo/1684362&size=lg

for another example of Velvia 100F.

 

Generally speaking. Very, very nice stuff with the best features

of Velvia 50 and Provia 100F.

As I'm about to shoot some long exposures with Velvia 100F in mid july I'd appreciate getting a copy of the spec sheet.

You can email it to me at info@wyofoto.com

 

Thanks in advance.

I had the good fortune to test Velvia 100F for Fuji in the Tetons between June 8-12. Attached is a representative scan.

 

It has a color palette much like Velvia 50 without IMO the excessive contrast. A full range of greens is possible. NO more black spruce in the Rockies. The color is warm like Velvia rather than cool like Provia 100F.

 

It's grain is much softer than Velvia 50. The grain is almost identical to Provia 100F, but it scans even better. Overall a very nice film for sunrise/sunset in the mountains. The high contrast of Velvia 50 still may be preferable in overcast weather.

 

It's flesh tones are not as horrid as Velvia 50, but not as good as Provia 100F. All in all Provia or Astia are IMO still preferable for portrait type shots.

 

See attached scan.<div></div>

To solve a problem you first have to understand its roots. The inflation in critique ratings over the past 2 years is IMO the result of mate raters pushing the standard of excellence ever lower. They do this of course to elevate their position and 'status' as great photographers. :-) To eliminate the problem you need to limit unabashed mate rating as well as unlimited 7's.

 

1. I think making it easier to rate extremely is bad. Just the reverse is needed. Ratings of 3,4,5 shouldn't require a comment. Ratings os 1,6,7 should. Why is it very good? Why is it bad?

 

2. A step in the right direction. I teach photography at the college level and write many critiques. They are at least 15 words long on average and sometimes, for great shots, much longer.

 

3. Limit the # of 7's by as suggested. (5% seems okay). Also the number of photos of any photographer rated in the last 30 days to a small number say 2 or 3. This will limit mate rating. It will also force people to give feedback to the huddled masses that are ignored by most people rating photos at Photo.Net. This step might also encourage their continued participation.

 

4. My most controversal suggestion. Make patron status a requirement for rating. I know some people are poor, but if they can afford a camera, film, scanner and computer, they can probably afford $25 to join photo.net. This would also raise money to help support the sight.

 

Hope this helps...

People like and buy artwork or photos that they can relate to on a personal level. This is the nature of art. A large majority of the US and European population lives in an intensely urban environement. They are, as a result very homocentric. Mankind to them is the center of creation and the universe. As a result they find it hard to relate to any form of art, photo or not that is not centered or at least has a foot in the human realm. To them the, majority of nature photos are irrelevent and boring.

 

Tom Mangelson who lives not too far from me is arguably the worlds most economically successful wildlife photographer. He has 7 galleries at last count scattered throughout the US. His shots that are the most popular and fastest selling have a 'human angle'. The polar bear or mountain lion cubs playing just like human kids. The eagle mom feeding her young. I've listened to people talk about shots as they walk through his Jackson,WY gallery. They are inevitably drawn to shots that evoke human fraternal emotions.

 

On another note, I sell landscape photos at a local gallery as a side to my usual job of teaching photography. The people that are drawn to my landscapes more than the wildlife shots tend to be of rural origin. They live near or within a days drive of the mountains I shoot or ones like them. Many visitors from large cities don't give the landscapes or wildlifes a 2d look. They are looking for art that contains people. The cowboys driving cattle on the range. The buffalo charging the cowboy on horseback.

I have the 45-85mm and use it withing a non-slim filter all the time.

No problem! I even use it with a cut down Cokin filter holder, (outer slots sawed off) and Sing-Ray ND filters with no problem even at 45mm.

 

See http://www.photo.net/photo/1432208

 

No sign of vignetting on 15"x22" prints.

I use a light Gitzo CF tripod quite successfully while hiking with a Pentax 645N MF camera. Here's the trick. Simply press down on the top of your camera as you release the shutter. You can easily apply 20-30 lbs of pressure. The top pressure will eliminate almost all vibration and movement. Old timers would sandbag there Pentax 6x7, but you can be the sandbag. Using this technique I get 24"x30" prints every bit as sharp as those taken with a Manfrotto tripod which weighs in at 9 lbs.

I was on a shoot with Michael Reichmann in the Teton.Yellowstone area over Oct 4-6. I own a Pentax 645N and various other MF and 35mm systems. I scan my film on a Nikon LS8000 scanner. The 645N is my camera of choice for landscape shooting over the last 2 years.

 

Michael brought some 11"x14" prints taken with the Canon 1DS with him. Straight out of the camera the 1DS womps 35mm Provia 100F prints hands down. Tonality of the images was such that it looked like they were shot with LF. They were slightly better than an unworked 645 Provia 100F scan. To get that level of tonality from my 645 trannies I work in PS selecting the skies and water reflections, carefully smart blurring them to remove the grain. I then carefully sharpen only the highly detailed areas of the image to bring out the detail. My best carefully worked 645 shots look to most people like LF at sizes up to and including 16"x20".

 

Bottom line, up to 13"x19" prints the EOS-1DS produces incredible results. This is enough for 95% of those at photo.net. At print sizes in the 20"x30" range I think MF, well worked by a expert PShop user will beat the limited 11MP detail of the 1DS. In other words 45 million good pixels beats 11 million superb pixels. If you need to print beyond 16x20, MF is still an option. If you print at sizes of 13x19 or less I wouldn't invest in a MF system now. Body + good scanner will cost you $1500 + $2500 = $4000. This almost the cost of a new 1DS and equal to the cost of Kodak Pro 14N body. Then add film and processing.

I own a Pentax 645Nii and I believe it can do it all.

With the 45-85mm zoom it's weighs about the same as a Nikon F5 and is superb for landscapes. Add the 120mm macro for portrait and macro work and you're set.

 

See http://www.photo.net/photo/650923

 

It can be handheld, but really if you don't shoot with a tripod the jump to MF won't get you anything. Moving MF cameras don't produce better pictures than moving 35mm cameras Buy a light tripod such as Bogen 3001 and use it! Just do it. If you can't do it, stick with your 35mm system and save the cash.

Thanks for the hands on Doug. My info was from a regional Contax dealer who tried to switch me to the Contax. I am very happy with my Pentax system and love the razor sharp zooms. Being a landscape photographer, the increased speed of the Zeiss fixed lenses on the Contax was meaningless.

Mountains don't usually move too fast, unless of course you're shooting Mt St Helens at the wrong time of year. : )

The above comments apply to my 45-85MM lens and the body I have is the 645NII the newer model.

Under most bright conditions prefocus and lock take about 1/2 second.

Under low light it can hunt for a second.

 

I use manual focus 100% of the time so this isn't issue.

An EOS 1V it's NOT!

 

Reports say the CONTAX 645 is better, probably about 2X as fast.

The base map was originally down loaded from the NPS Grand Teton web sight. No copyright statement could be seen.

I think there are similar maps at other NPS sights.

I've created a Grand Teton online Photo Map to aid photographers

headed to Grand Teton National Park. It has the most common photo

locations listed along with season, time, film and equipment suggestions.

<P>

Hope this is helpful.. more will added as time permits.

<P>

See it at <A HREF="http://wyofoto.com/Teton_Photo_Map.htm">http://wyofoto.com/Teton_Photo_Map.htm</a>.

I've created a Grand Teton online Photo Map to aid photographers

headed to Grand Teton National Park. It has the most common photo

locations listed along with season, time, film and equipment suggestions.

 

Hope this is helpful.. more will added as time permits.

In most situations I shoot sunsets/sunrises with Provia 100F.

It has 1 f-stop more range in the shadows than Velvia or 100VS.

You can raise it's color saturation easily in Photoshop by about 20 units if you want it to look Velvia like without the contrast.

 

See http://www.wyofoto.com/Assiniboine.htm

 

This was shot with Provia, the forground is actually that green.

It had rained for 2 weeks prior to this shot.

My wife just purchased a new Pentax 645NII with a 45-85mm zoom lens.

Close inspection of the back/insert assembly and body shows NO NEW CONTACTS which could be used for a digital back.

 

If one is built the only possible communication that could take place would be via the LEDS which write exposure data on the film and the new electronic shutter release. While this is possible and a back might have its own batteries and microdrive this would truly be a wild way to interface it!

The phantom ranch is in a deep inner gorge of a feeder creek at the bottom. Not much available in the way of sunrise/sunset photos.

You could hike back up the Kaibab trail to the canyon bottom you see from the top, but this would take at least several hours.