jimpete

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>meant "so if you were shooting something at F16 set the infinity mark to F8".</p>

<p>Hi Karl, I use the Mamiya 711 100% for landscapes. I still don't own a digital camera. Anyway, I agree with David about the 2 stop grad filter. This has worked out well for me. I don't have a 3 stop hard, which I imagine would be more difficult. Mamiya makes a polarizer for the camera which is a good way to go. I think you could probably get one for about $100 on Ebay. It is a bit fiddly, but once you play around with it a bunch it works. I dial in 1 2/3 exposure compensation on the camera and it has worked every time. You can turn it in hand and see the effect just like other polarizers. Lee makes a filter kit (RF75) for rangefinders. This would work on the Mamiya 7 11. It is a bit spendy, and I never did purchase it. I use all screw in filters. There are some quirks with the Mamiya 7 11, which just have to be worked out with experience using it. You have to remember to take the lens cap off. The viewfinder is amazing and of course with a rangefinder everything looks beautifully in focus. Figuring out the focusing was the biggest challenge for me. Most of the time I like everything in focus. Of course if this is not a concern then just focus on your primary subject. So to get everything in focus I use either infinity when that is suitable (when there is nothing in the foreground for 30 or 50 feet or more such as off of viewpoints, cliffs etc.), or I use hyperfocal. If you research this out here you will find that the depth of field scales on the Mamiya 7 11 are overly optimistic. My experience is that it is two stops too optimistic, so if you were shooting something at F16 set the infinity mark to F11 and everything will be in focus. Also, for this camera some folks report a loss of image quality due to diffraction at F22. I think for a 14x11 print this woudn't show up. I have some minor loss in quality at F22 for prints at 16x20, but not bad. The biggest print I have made is 20"x30" and this was from an infinity shot and not hyperfocal and the results are good. Prints bigger than this become a hassle with matting and storing them so haven't tried it. I think hyperfocal shots for 16x20 prints (of course all on tripod) are good. It all depends on your quality standards and viewing distance of the print. A well executed chrome from the Mamiya 7 11 on the light table will astound you. That is my favorite part of the the process. For scanning I use 3200 Imacon Flextight scans for $10 through AgXimaging in Michigan. You have to spot them in photoshop yourself. I have never tried a drum scan as they are too expensive for me. Also, the close focusing distance is not like your pentax would be so that is a concern. I have quite a few shots where the foreground is a bit out of focus. This can easily be cropped out to 6x9 format with little to no discernible loss in quality. The 6x9 format is cool so if you plan for it (or even unplanned) you kind of have a 6x9 camera as well. As far as your original filter question is concerned I think it is doable, but not perfect. I usually shoot on ael, and use the exposure compensation for whatever filter you are using. Also, the in camera meter is pretty good, but lately I have been using a manual spotmeter for better results. It is easy to blow out the highlights using the in built meter with transparencies. Hope this helps. Jim </p>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>Thankyou very much for the thoughtful and interesting answers. I really apprecitate it!</p>