peter_hughes
-
Posts
210 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by peter_hughes
-
-
DOF is highly dependent on the degree of enlargement. No scale or chart, however carefully it is figured, takes this factor into account.
-
I understand that there was a format comparison in Photo Techniques a while back. A horse in a field. The bottom line was that in the photo taken with the 8x10 camera, the horse was gone.
I think comparsions such as these are interesting but really meaningless. If I could shoot everything with an 8x10 camera, I would. But sometimes the 35mm w/autofocus, auto-exposure, motor drive, f/1.8 lens, etc., is the only instrument that will bring home the goods.
Go to my site and see photos taken with 35, 6x6, 6x7, 8x10. What's important to me is the unifying vision, not the fact that some are grainier than others.
-
Comparison of 35mm to MF in the real world:
http://www.ravenvision.com/modelsterrick1.htm
http://www.ravenvision.com/modelsterrick2.htm
Tech data: 35mm: Canon EOS-3 w/85mm f/1.8 USM @ f/4 Delta 100 in PMK; MF: Pentax 67 w/135mm Super Takumar @ f/8 Delta 400 in PMK Developed -2. All hand-held.
-
-
If you say so. I have an old 500 C/M and I don't know the 501 at all. BTW, that is a FANTASTIC lens! I have one (albeit the black T* version) and I adore it. You can see some of my results at: http://www.ravenvision.com/peterhughesportraits.htm
All but the top left and right and the bottom center were taken with the 150mm Sonnar.
-
Set the synch lever to "V", then trip the shutter. Note that you will have to use the shutter release lock, located around the shutter release button, to keep the back shutter from closing.
-
Photography is a very technical medium, and, as such, people ask a lot of questions regarding technique--which may be boring but, I think, very informative and useful, not only for the beginner but for more experienced photographers as well.
Discussing the esthetics of photography is another thing entirely, and I'm not sure what value it has--if any. It's difficult enough keeping the "which camera should I buy" questions from degenerating into flame-wars (anyone who doubts this should check out the great "Canon v. Nikon" debates that rage on the Photoshopper forums!), let alone those questions pertaining to more philosophical matters, which often come down to nothing more than opinion--and we all know that opinions are like hemorrhoids: every asshole has one. Anyway, photography is a visual medium and talking about it is a bit like talking about sex: it may be interesting but sooner or later you just have to go out and DO it.
All in all, I think this is one of the best forums around. At least the kids seems to stay away.
My only wish is that more women would participate. In general, this is a problem with all photo forums, which are entirely dominated by men. Maybe women just don't like endless tech talk the way men do.
-
I have a Hassy and it's a pleasure to load--hardly automatic, but at least smooth and reliable. That was the damned thing about the Pentax: no matter how careful I was, I was never sure of getting the spools in right without fumbling. Sometimes it went 1,2,3 and sometimes 1,2,#&%@!*!
Other than that, I loved the camera and would recommend it to anyone who had the patience to deal with the loading.
I sold it (a) because of the loading and (b) because I found myself using my EOS-3 for most of my shooting. And I needed the trade-in value to buy a lens for that camera.
-
This question will generate a lot of heat--as well as hot air!
Funny, but a year ago I would have said go for 645. But lately, this ex-8x10-user has been doing an awful lot of work with 35mm. I still have my trusty Hassy, but I recently sold my Pentax 6x7 to buy a premium lens for my Canon EOS-3, which is now almost all I shoot with.
I guess it depends what you want to shoot. Landscapes? By all means go for the larger format! Yet, there are plenty of people who do landscapes--albeit non-traditional ones--with 35mm. And how big do you need to print? I can get an 11x14 with 35mm Pan-F that rivals a cropped 6x6 shot with Delta 100. Most fashion and editorial portraiture never blows to bigger than 8.5 x11. And what about the extra weight and bulk involved in larger format equipment? Are you really willing to lug that around?
-
I've never heard that. In fact, I've done it many times myself with no evil effects.
You know, someone (Tiffen?) does make "warm polarizers."
-
I recently sold my Pentax 6x7. Not that I didn't like the camera,
just that I found it exasperatingly difficult to load. I got tired of
being on a shoot, with models, an assistant, stylists, etc., and
fumbling with the film and the take-up spool. I actually almost
unraveled a roll on a couple of occasions!
My question is, does anyone know if the new P67II is any easier to
load?
-
There is a small "lip" at the edge of the magazine insert that is controlled by the locking key. The lip must be UP when loading film, which must pass UNDER the lip. The lip is placed in the DOWN position for inserting the film into the magazine. As far as I can tell, this is simply to prevent the film from hanging up on the edge of the magazine. However, if the film is not loaded right, you will get the spacing problem you describe.
-
Garret -- That's interesting! I'll have to check it out. Thanks. Of course, my holder is a 2-slot, so I'll have to saw off one more slot.
-
I don't know about other 6x4.5 cameras, but my partner uses a Bronica ETRs, which shoots horizontals, not verticals, in the un-rotated position. However, I think 6x4.5 is a bit small for serious landscape photography.
Personally, I have never been able to get used to any camera that does not allow me to view directly through the lens. I think that, for landscapes, I'd want to be able to preview my depth-of-field, which would leave rangefinders out of the running. My nomination would be the Pentax 6x7.
6x9 is a very rectangular format, similar in aspect ratio to 35mm. If you like 35mm for landscapes, you'll probably like 6x9. Otherwise, stick with 6x7--or go directly to a 4x5 view camera.
-
You might try electronic contact cleaner (Freon). It evaporates almost instantly and leaves no residue. But don't blame me if you make things worse. Try your best not to allow the solvent into the lens itself. I screwed up a 150mm f/4 Sonnar for my Hassy this way! Had to bring it in to be professionally cleaned.
-
Welcome to the wonderful world of filters!
There's no easy answer to this problem. Many people buy filters in several sizes to fit all their lenses. Some try to make one size fit all.
The Cokin "P" series will fit most lenses--the closest I've come to "one size fits all." But even with the outer slot hacksawed off, the Cokin holder still vignettes with my 28-135 Canon zoom (@ 28mm).
Note that I have to use 4" gels for the 45mm SMC Takumar for my P6X7. The Cokin is not adaptable to an 82mm thread. I suspect it would vignette anyway.
-
This is a very interesting question. I have a Hassy, a Pentax 6x7, and a Canon EOS-3, and find that I can usually compose well with any of them. See my website at: http://www.ravenvision.com/rvapeter.htm for many examples of both square and rectangular photos--mostly portraits and nudes.
-
Kodak Black Opaque is the standard product for this task. It is
really *opaque*, unlike Spotone.
<p>
-
Tray process your b&w film in a darkened bathroom or kitchen. Contact
print using some "alternative process" that does not require a
darkroom. 4x5 gets you back to basics. Classical music instead of pop.
<p>
-
I currently have three cameras: A Hassy 500C/M, a Pentax 6x7, and a Canon EOS-3. The first is the epitome of mechanical camera design, the second a hybrid with a crude TTL meter and an electronic shutter, and the third the epitome of modern high-tech with every bell & whistle in the book. I like them all--and they all require an individual technique. In some ways, the EOS is the most difficult to use because the options are so great!
To make your Hassy a really useable camera you will need to (1) replace the focusing screen with an Acute Matte, Beattie, or Maxwell screen; (2) fix the light leaks in the camera back--not a difficult or expensive procedure, if the only problem is a worn out seal; (3) probably have the camera and lenses cleaned and lubed. It is a magnificent hand-built instrument that will never go out of style. Its only real drawback, as far as I'm concerned, is the square negative. Either you love it or hate it. I've done excellent work with it, as have many, many other photographers; but it can be very stifling.
The TLRs are not very versatile cameras. IMO you should sell them and buy something really usable.
The Mamaya is a HUGE, HEAVY camera! And, IMO, extremely overpriced. If you want something you can shoot hand-held, it is definitely not the way to go. But it is very versatile.
The Pentax 6x7 is another option, in many ways the ideal camera. Very ergonomic, very reasonably priced. And the optics are excellent. They just came out with the P67II, which has some automation.
-
I generally consider 1 ml Rodinal concentrate per sheet of 4x5 film
to be adequate. Since a 36 exposure roll of 35mm is roughly
equivalent to a sheet of 8x10 (4 sheets 4x5), I would say that, yes,
4 ml's would be about right. Anyway, I have developed INNUMERABLE
rolls of 36 exposure film in my day, many, many of them in Rodinal
1:50, and never had any problems. Go for it.
<p>
-
I agree with Andreas and John. A non-interchangeable-lens TLR will not really acquaint you with the wonders of medium format. You may simply be turned off and decide to forget the whole thing. MF is a lot more effort and expense than 35mm, there are difficult new techniques that must be mastered, etc., and unless you are convinced that it's worth it, you just might give up in disgust.
On the other hand, a Hasselblad is a complex camera, one that will take you more than a weekend rental to master. So you might consider buying one, as John suggests--the classic 500C/M is a beautiful instrument that will never go out of style and will always retain a good resale value. Just bear in mind that this is a *system* camera, and a basic body, magazine and 80mm lens is only going to whet your appetite for more--and the "more" is going to cost you! Also, it is a 20-30 year-old camera, so make sure it's in fine condition and working properly before buying: someone thoroughly acquainted with used Hassys should advise you on this matter.
As for the Mamaya TLR, well, this is a pretty big and heavy camera, so try it out before buying--and, of course, you'll have all the disadvantages of a TLR. Personally, I would stay away from the Kiev like the plague--I've heard too many horror stories about this clunker. A Bronica S2 is a proven camera, a "poor man's Hasselblad", with good, relatively inexpensive Nikkor lenses.
If you must buy cheaply, the Yashica 124 is probably the safest way to go.
I should add that one of the weak spots on older MF cameras is the dim focusing screen. An Acute Matte, Beattie, or Maxwell screen will make all the difference in the world!
As a last thought, you might look around for a used Pentax 6x7 MLU. You can get into one of these (with a 90mm or 105mm lens) for under $1000. It's a great camera.
As a last, last thought, you might think of bypassing the "normal" lens and getting something else instead. The 75mm - 105mm lenses on MF cameras, like the 50mm lenses on 35mm cameras, have a tendency to be pretty boring and might not excite you the way a wide-angle or tele might.
Just for your information, I own a Hassy 500C/M and a Pentax 6x7 and can recommend both.
-
For my 80mm f/2.8 C T* Planar I use a 52mm Nikon shade for a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor with no vignetting problems.
-
I don't really understand everyone's preoccupation with mammoth tripods. I use a Bogen 3021 with a 3055 ball head for my P6x7 and Hassy w/135mm & 150mm lenses respectively. Many would say that this 'pod is inadequate, but I've experienced no problems. I usually lock the mirror up on the P6x7 and trip the shutter with a long mechanical release, but I sometimes shoot handheld (at speeds of 1/125 and above). I'm a little more daring with the Hassy, often shooting on a "loose" ball head, no MLU, tripping the shutter directly. Of course, with my portraiture, the absolute n'th degree of sharpness is not as important to me as capturing a "moment of truth", so to speak. But if you'll check out my site, you'll see that my technique is more than adequate.
Purchase of a Canon System
in Nature
Posted