david b

<p>It comes down to the individual photographer's personal tax situation. If all your earnings were from photography, then I can imagine that being a sole trader would be the way to go.</p>

<p>If, however, you had another job, which (and I'm speaking from a UK perspective here) put you into the higher tax bracket, then any income earnt at all from photography will suffer deductions of almost 55% or so once tax (40%) and National Insurance are paid. </p>

<p>In this situation, you would not need to earn all that much from your photography to make a limited company / corporation worthwhile since you could organise that so that you <em>legally</em> paid much less tax. Which is fair enough in my view, earning money from photography is hard enough, without being left just 40-something pence in the £ by the time you've paid tax etc.</p>

 

<p>Could you use or adapt the rail from a large format monorail camera?</p>

<p>There is unlikely to be much more than 300dpi of information in the original, and as such your 40x32 inch print can't contain more than about 70 dpi. This might be fine if you're viewing the print from a distance, as you might expect to in a print of that size, but you can't expect it to be be critically sharp or detailed looked at up close, because the fine detail, at that size, just will not be present. You'd need about 1200dpi in the 10x8 original for a top quality print at 40x32, and whilst this could be easily extracted from a 10x8 neg or transparency, the 10x8 print just hasn't got that much data.</p>

<p>Doesn't mean the print wont look good though at a distance - the suggestion to try a section first isn't a bad idea.</p>

<p>More helpful responses, thanks.</p>

<p>I did consider the 17 - 40mm Canon lens, but decided against it as (a) I don't really need or want a lens wider than 24mm, and (b) I would still be in frequent lens changing territory as it is only 40mm at the longest end. </p>

<p>My plan is that when I'm doing outdoor photography, the 24-105mm lens will rarely come off the camera, if at all.</p>

<p>Anyway, I've bought one, so when it arrives, I can see for myself.</p>

<p>Thanks again for the useful input from everyone.</p>

<p>Many thanks for all these responses. There seems to be a current general theme that the 24-105mm is the way to go, though I must admit that even if it doesn't make much money, I can't really see the point in having the 35mm 2.0 and the 24-105mm.<br>

I do think that reduced / no lens changing in the field is a definite advantage, since much of our landscape photography is under challenging conditions - hills, windswept beaches, 'bad' weather etc.<br>

<br />So I think I'll get one, and evaluate before being too hasty to get rid of the 35mm 2.0, though as I see things, I'm planning to standardise on the 24-105mm, 70-200mm and 50mm as a 'fast' lens but this will probably only see indoor use.</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

<br /> I have a Canon 5D Mk1, and currently (all Canon) 35mm 2.0 , 50mm 1.8 prime lenses and 70-200mm 4.0 'L'. I've got rid of a lot of camera gear I don't need, and this is my only kit. Subject to the question below, I'm more than happy with that.<br>

<br />I am interested in both landscape and portraiture, and want a wider lens than the 35mm. As far as I see it, there are two main options:</p>

<p>1. Stick with the current lenses (which I am very satisfied with) and buy a 24mm prime lens. This sounds like the cheapest option, and perhaps might(?) give me the best quality, and will give me a lens range from 24mm to 200mm which is all I need and want.<br>

<br />2. Buy a 24-105mm 4.0 'L' zoom, and since this will incorporate 35mm of course, sell the 35mm prime to help fund it.</p>

<p>I can afford both options, especially if I sell the 35mm. It seems to me that the advantage of option 1 is that it is cheaper, but means a 4 lens system, so likely more lens changing in the field. It may also offer higher quality than using the zoom, but I don't know about that. The advantage of option 2 is that I would not need to change lenses much and would have only a 3 lens system (2 for landscapes when I wouldn't need the faster standard lens). In fairness 99% of my landscape work could be done with the focal lengths of 24 to 105mm...So actually that could be one lens...</p>

<p>I'm expecting the 50mm lens and the 70-200mm to be all I need for portraits, so I guess I'm asking about landscape use really. I have all the other stuff like filter rings in all sizes, etc.</p>

<p>I am interested in what people would do?</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

David.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks, I appreciate the advice.</p>

<p>Hi,<br>

<br />I'm wanting to get a studio flask kit suitable for a beginner. I want to photograph friends and family, probably not more than small groups maximum 4 people at once. I've seen adverts for Interfit, Elinchrom and Bowens. Do people think there is any great advantage of one manufacturer over the other? I see that some are 150Ws, others 200Ws and upto 400Ws within my budget of £500(ish) max. Are the higher powers probably unecessary for small groups? Or is this an area where a bit of extra money is well spent?<br>

<br />Also, would I be better of starting with softboxes or unbrellas? Or one of each?<br>

I am in the UK so anything suggested needs to be available here. I have, as I say, up to £500 or so to spend but don't want to spend money unecessarily if cheaper kit will do, obviously.<br>

I plan on using a Canon 5D with 70-200 Canon L f/4 lens, 50mm f/1.8 lens, which I already have.<br>

Any advice gratefully received.<br>

Thanks.</p>

I use a 1 and 2 stop ND grad regularly, and the 3 stop grad almost never. The other point worth mentioning in response to stacking grads is that they can be staggered to produce two zones of graduation in different places. This is a technique I've used occasionally, and also a technique described by Joe Cornish...

"Between benzene and Isopropyl Alcohol, what's the easiest on the negatives?"

 

- Don't know, but bear in mind benzene is a highly toxic carcinogen.

 

Also, I can't agree with you about water David. Put a scrap velvia tranny in even some mildly tepid water, touch the emulsion side...see what I mean

I considered this same choice some time ago, and decided that if I was carrying the weight of either kit around, I might as well go for 5x4 LF, with all the benefits of tilt/shift control etc as well as the larger transparency. There are also no mirror vibration issues.

I retrospect, for myself, I made the right decision and love 5x4.

 

If I had to go for either the Pentax or Mamiya, then I'd go for the Pentax. If I had a free choice restricted though to MF, then I'd have either the M7 or a Fuji rangefinder

Best of luck!

I have 90/8 and 150/5.6 used with 4x5 for landscape. 99% of the time the 90mm is wide enough for me.

A quick question: If I rotate the back on my Wista 45VX so it is

orientated for upright or 'portrait' format, then using my 90mm f/8

Schnieder Super Angulon lens, will the view include the bottom of the

bed, assuming no movements, and infinity focus. If the answer

is 'none' then how much. if any. front tilt can be used?

 

I know of course, that I could just try it, and will do so at the

weekend, but wanted to get the opinions of others.

 

Thanks very much!

What Joe says about the Fujis is correct. Why do you want to know, though? What difference does it make? Most opinion on these cameras is that the lenses are superb on both.

I had a GW690III, and thought the quality fantastic. I know people with the Mamiya who feel the same about the M7 lenses...

Keith, I can agree with much of what you and the other posters above have said, and admire much landscape photography by photographers using 6x6. I personally prefer a slight rectangle format, and now shoot 4x5 lf, finding the aspect ratio perfect for my needs. The dof issues you raise also disappear with a little front tilt on my view camera also!

So, who were/are the pro labs???

You don't say what you intend spending or what monorail you intend buying, but given your comments and concerns over portability and robustness, perhaps consider a folding field camera? Some of the metal field cams are virtually indestructable folded up. I have a Wista VX but there are also others, eg the Toyo45A/45AII , etc.

Just a thought...

Hi Paul, and others.

I'm based in Northumberland, and shoot 5x4 colour landscape locally.

Please count me in!

Best wishes,

If I hit someone with my Wista VX I'd be on a murder charge...can't imagine it wouldn't kill them...

Perhaps the implied suggestion of rudeness towards anyone who suggests something you don't think is sensible advice - or what you've made up your mind you don't want to hear - will put people off?

The problems with dof discussed by everyone in this thread were more or less the reason I sold my Fuji GW690III (with a 90mm lens). I could not get front to infinity sharpness to an acceptable standard, at f/32.

So I sold the Fuji, and went to LF. Not only do I get a much bigger 4x5 transparency, but a bit of front tilt goes a very long way on the depth of focus front.

How does 1 metre to infinity all tack sharp on a 90mm wide angle strike you...?

Try it an you'll want to forget all this hyperfocal approximate stuff...

Well, you'll get much better quality from the 6x9cm piece of film than from 35mm, if the camera is used appropriately. I had a GW690III until recently and I have a couple of superb scans/lightjet prints from it.

I imagine the real difference in quality would not be so noticable until a bigger print size than 12x8 inch.

I sold my GW to go to large format, due to flexibility and dof issues...but it's a great camera...superb lens.

Interesting question. I bought a GW690III a couple of years ago (exactly same camera + lens but just bigger film area than the 670). I thought it was great, but sold it within a year, not because it wasn't a good camera but (a) I found the standard focal length lens limiting but (b) mainly, the DOF of the 90mm lens wasn't enough for the type of landscapes I wanted to take.

I've now gone to 4x5 large format, where front tilt cures most DOF issues.

The GW cameras are superb, if they suit what you want. Bear in mind that use of a polariser or ND grad aint the easiest thing in the world on a rangefinder (but manageable nonetheless).

The M7 is certainly one of the best ways of getting a 6x7cm image in a relatively small and light package (compared to any 6x7 SLR anyway). Although less flexible due to fixed lenses and no meter, consider the 6x7 and 6x9 Fuji rangefinders...cheaper than the Mamiya and exceptional quality and handling also.

I don't think a properly functioning etrs will fire/wind on with the dark slide in, but its just a thought...Otherwise, I'd vote for film in back to front. I did this once when I had an etrs, many years ago.