joe_casey5

<p>Sunil: Peter Lik has never 'extensively' used a Canon 5DII. That's grossly incorrect! Yes, he is seen at rare times on his show (which was only one season) using a Canon DSLR with black electrical tape over the model and name, but mostly for scouting locations. I've actually been to three of Peter Lik's gallery locations and was once granted access to his personal proof book by the director of his Oahu store, which has his field notes (the book they don't sell!). ALL of the work for sale in his gallery was done with either a Hasselblad H2 (both film and digital), a Mamiya 645 and a Linhof 617, this I know for a fact.</p>

<p>Only recently did he start using the Nikon D800E, and only for a limited number of prints. I get it though... some people will get their panties in a bunch over my initial comments about Canon, however those comments stemmed from two years of frustration in working with inferior equipment! Mind you I went from using a Hasselblad H2 with P30 back to a Canon 5DII (a big downgrade), which I did mostly for size and weight.</p>

<p>If you honestly believe the Canon 5DII makes sharp images, I must ask you this: Have you blown them up to 30x40 and hung them (on a wall...) next to the same composition shot with 4x5 or 5x7 LF film? I'm certain you wouldn't like the outcome and would be left feeling rather inadequate in that circumstance. You see, what your eye perceives as 'sharp' is only relative to the size of print or image you are viewing. If you are viewing an image with a true resolution of 4000 x 6000 (just an example) yet you are only seeing it as a thumbnail or down-sized sample online then of course your eye will think what are seeing is sharp. If the composition is interesting enough and the lighting and/or subject is able to hold your attention well enough, your eyes will be more captivated by the context of the image and forget about sharp detail. Where this all changes is when you stand in a gallery and look up at a picture on the wall. Do you stand back 10 or 15' feet or do you walk up and look at within a few feet? ;-))) Most people don't stand in the next county when viewing pictures in a gallery. They walk RIGHT UP to it! And that's where the images shot on a DSLR (regardless of software processing, noise tweaking, magic powder sprinkling) cannot hold a candle to large format film. There are just too many factors to even go into here: image circle, distortion, available light (which is huge in landscapes and greatly affected in smaller format lenses, contributing to noise), resolving power, film plane size (which in the 4x5 format equals about 200 + Megapixels).</p>

<p>People / portraits, sports, weddings, action, photojournalism, yes... 35mm will dominate these areas as it still is the go-to format for specific work. The aforementioned types of photography however are not what I'm referring to. Multiple internal filters intentionally designed and engineered to BLUR the image to help prevent 'jaggies' do not result in a DSLR print besting or even equalling 4x5 film.</p>

<p>Until recently I was eyeing the Nikon D800E as I'd given serious consideration to it. I've also seen some great landscapes shot with this camera that when blown to actual size (true resolution) with a pier in the frame....</p>

<p>......IT'S GOT JAGGIES! Yep! Nikon's best DSLR still has jaggies. Those funky lines that show up (when viewed at true resolution), that cannot lie and prove why digital photography hasn't come as far as most people would like to believe.</p>

<p>I greatly appreciate everyone's input and putting up with me ;-). I've owned the Fuji GX617 for a while now and cannot express enough how much I love shooting with that camera. I'm picking up a used Wista 45SP next month with a couple of Schneider SA lenses. Sorry digital... I'll always come back and dust you off for travel shots... and taking pictures of the kids!</p>

<p>And for those worried that film is dead... it's not (still alive and kicking)... it just smells funny ;-)</p>

<p>John Bailey has a good point! APS-C, 35mm (FF Digital), MF 6x7, 6x9 6x17 and larger format 4x5, all have different uses and different things to offer. I've owned a couple of Fuji 690 MF film cameras, had a Hasselblad H2 with P30 digital back and could shoot film and digital on that rig, owned a Canon 5DII with TS-E lenses. I currently have a Pentax K5 IIs and a Fuji GX617. I'm going to be picking up a Wista 4x5 in a couple of months. The Canon 5DII has been my least favorite camera. IMHO, DSLR cameras are suited best for: wedding photography, portraits, photojournalism, travel, scouting and hobbyists or family fun pics.</p>

<p>MF film has a huge advantage over even the best DSLR, full-frame or otherwise. Large Format (4x5) is currently the King of the Road and hopefully will remain that way for some years. The Tilt Shift options of 4x5 with any lens makes it the ideal landscape camera where complete control and maximum detail are critical. Just look at a photograph enlarged to 30x50 taken on 4x5 film vs a DSLR. The DSLR would be heavily pixelated at 30x50 and yet the 4x5 will still have detail to offer and room to enlarge it even further. This is the reason that museum and art gallery quality photos are often shot on large format film. Just visit the Ansel Adams Gallery and you'll see what I'm talking about.</p>

<p>MF film is a very close second to LF film as it offers plenty of detail to blow images up quite large. The main advantage LF has over MF film is the control of movements and micro-swing capabilities of some field cameras. FYI: using a field camera like a Wista 45 is much easier to carry and take with you than a Sinar rail camera, which requires a box to house it vs the field camera which will fit in most backpacks. Sure the weight is a factor but I'm accustomed to taking two cameras with me in the field and packing about 30-35 pounds of gear. As was previously pointed out by John, you can take a small backpack and DSLR to locate and compose your image, take daylight readings and get some scout images then come back to the same location later with a good Mamiya, Hasselblad, Fuji, Pentax 67 or other 4x5 camera to get the perfect shot.</p>

<p>Keep in mind all formats have a use and each can compliment the other. I use my Pentax K5 IIs for pictures of my kids, portraits, walk-around photography, travel and GP (general purpose) shots. I use the Fuji GX617 when I know I'm going somewhere that offers sweeping vistas or broad landscapes that I'll want to make panoramic prints with. If I'm going somewhere that offers ideal landscapes I'll want a MF film camera like a 6x7, 6x9 or 6x17 or LF like the 4x5. There are some places where the MF doesn't allow me to tilt and shift so the 4x5 becomes the ideal camera. Architecture is unique and you can use both a 4x5 camera or a 35mm FF DSLR with a Tilt-Shift lens. I wouldn't limit yourself to one format unless you are limited in funds and have no plans to shoot multiple types of composition.</p>

 

<p>Hey Joel: you make a good point. Even Peter Lik sells smaller sized prints in his gallery. Keep in mind there are many different mediums in which to display and sell your work. Years ago while visiting one of Peter Lik's studios in Hawaii, I didn't have the money to buy a large print so I purchased an artist's proof book. The prints on each page are not much larger than the actual positive size in many cases, yet the colors are amazingly vibrant and everyone that I've showed it to couldn't put the book down for some time. The key is what is your focus. Do you want to sell large prints in a gallery? Keeping in mind those large prints can sell for thousands while the book I bought cost me $50! There in lies the rub as Shakespeare would say.</p>

<p>I own a Howtek D4000 drum scanner. While mine is about 20 years old now and isn't as fancy as a Heidelburg or some of the more expensive ICG models, it certainly gets the job done. I've seen comparisons of film scanned on drum vs. the best flatbeds and the drum scans always win. The trick is there is much more work that goes into drum scanning with the mounting process alone consuming a lot of time and patience. Flatbed scanners are a great alternative when you don't plan on hanging your work in a gallery for sale. A good flatbed like the Epson V750 can make a great scan of most any film and give you the ability to showcase your work online, to friends, for stock images, etc. Just know if you are a true artist and wish to compete and showcase your work in galleries, you will need a drum scanner for that.</p>

<p>I was able to find a thread online that tells you how to set the camera up for older lenses. Funny that Pentax doesn't provide this in the user manual. I understand that Canon and Nikon wouldn't but Pentax has always been a photographer's camera and it's common knowledge that there are millions of old M42 mount lenses still in circulation. Oh well... at least I was able to figure it out. Thank for your all your responses.</p>

<p>So, I've owned this camera since it was released late in 2012. I ordered it and received it in January. I've shot about 3000 pictures with it in that time and more recently began to notice that when shooting my older M42 mount lenses and using all manual settings, the camera would fire one shot in focus and one blurry (this was shooting strictly sunset shots). <br>

The camera was locked on a tripod and not moved between shots. I'm curious to know if anyone else has had this problem. It seems odd that this would happen since once the lens is focused properly, it shouldn't matter which lens / camera combination is matched, at that point the camera is just the recording mechanism and has no control over focus. <br>

My thoughts are that Pentax has somehow designed the sensor and internal focus diodes to look for available light (focusing) regardless of the lens that is attached to it and as a result, when it is coupled with a lens it doesn't recognize, it tries to compensate for the diminished light electronically or simply has a 'brain fart'.<br>

I'd appreciate hearing from anyone that's had this problem.</p>

<p>-Joe</p>

<p>I bought a coupler to connect some of 49mm manual lenses together (reversed) to make a macro setup. The only problem is, when I did it, neither lens will focus and give me ANY image whatsoever. I'm using a Pentax 50mm SMC lens as the prime (facing front) with a Zeiss Jena 35mm prime facing in (reversed). Any ideas as to what I'm doing wrong?</p>

<p>Dean, was the sheet film the same speed and type as the roll film? Fuji still makes Velvia 100 for 4x5 and Kodak and Illford still have 4x5 film. I would compare like to like and also make sure the lenses are evenly matched as 30+ year old lenses won't have the same coatings as modern Schneider, Fuji or Nikon lenses will (ex: Super Symmar vs Super Angulon).</p>

<p>@Christopher: Hey Chris that's cool! You should make a YouTube video of how you load and use that box camera. I've been wanting to add a 4x5 to my workflow but haven't yet due to available funds... ;-) Every photographers biggest problem!</p>

<p>@Christopher: Hey Chris that's cool! You should make a YouTube video of how you load and use that box camera. I've been wanting to add a 4x5 to my workflow but haven't yet due to available funds... ;-) Every photographers biggest problem!</p>

<p>Dean, was the sheet film the same speed and type as the roll film? Fuji still makes Velvia 100 for 4x5 and Kodak and Illford still have 4x5 film. I would compare like to like and also make sure the lenses are evenly matched as 30+ year old lenses won't have the same coatings as modern Schneider, Fuji or Nikon lenses will (ex: Super Symmar vs Super Angulon).</p>

<p>I believe Paul has a good point: you cannot substitute a quality lens for good technique and a skilled eye. I own the Fuji GX617 and I previously owned the Fuji GW690II and GSW690III. IMHO Fuji makes excellent lenses with beautiful contrast. I've never shot the Linhof 617 camera though I have to say I wasn't impressed by the design, as you have to disassemble the camera just to load and unload film whereas with the Fuji, you simply trip the lever on top and the door swings down: simple! Perhaps Peter Like doesn't mind leaving his camera exposed to the elements while he sets down the camera back and screw but to me, if you are working in wind, dust, sand, wet conditions... you don't want to leave the interior of your camera exposed to the elements longer than necessary.<br /> I will say that switching to the 617 format from 690 has been most challenging for me. The GX617 requires a center ND filter (which I have) to light the whole frame. This requires compensating +1 stop when metering. In addition, if I'm shooting in a high-contrast scene I'll use a CPL as well, so now I'm compensating +2 Stops: in other words a meter reading of Zone 5 at 1/15 of a second actually becomes 1/4. It takes a bit longer and I have to remember to slow down when using this camera as it's not quick like my Pentax K5 IIs. Whenever I try to rush, I always mess up, so patience is the real key to making great images with this format. Honestly, I would say patience, technique and a trained eye are all MORE important than the brand of lens you're using. I'll give up my Fuji GX617... when they pry it from my cold, dead hands ;-).</p>

<p>You people are just goofy! I own the Pentax K5IIs and as far as I'm concerned it's one of the smallest, most travel-easy semi-pro camera ever made, period! Try lugging around my old Hasselblad H2 with P30 back and 50-110 zoom lens (at 10 pounds even) or my Fuji GX617 or a 4x5 Wista with its accessories. People that want smaller are just plain daffy in the brain! The K5IIs is so small in my hands and lightweight, I'm thinking of getting the battery grip just to make it feel more comfortable in my hand.</p>

<p>I have the Fuji GX617 with 105mm lens. Fuji made the 90, 105, 180 and 300mm lenses for this camera. The thing I like about the GX617 over the Linhof is that the Fuji has a simple lever-open release with hinged drop-down door giving you immediate access to your film. The Linhof requires removing the entire back with screws and setting it aside, re-loading film and then re-attaching. To me, this is a major hinderance in the field as there have been times when I was shooting in wet weather and didn't have a dry place to set down camera parts. Not to mention, getting dust and debris on parts that are exposed to the inside of the camera body. For these reasons and the fact that Fuji makes some great glass, I prefer the GX617.</p>

<p>So, I have recently converted over to using mostly older prime lenses on my K5IIs. The problem I've encountered is that this camera is a new DSLR, designed to work mostly with modern zoom and automatic prime lenses and when using these older lenses my light meter does not want to function! This is frustrating as I've read the manual and tried different things but nothing seems to work. I have the M42 - K mount adapter which allows use of older Takumar and Zeiss lenses.<br>

There is a menu setting 'C' Custom Settings #4 which allows you to set the shutter to fire (permitted) with the aperture ring set to manual, unfortunately, there is no setting which allows you to control the light meter! How do I fix this?<br>

The only thing I can figure is since the camera's software is designed to read the appropriate aperture and bases it's light reading on the F-stop, that if it can't read the F-stop it doesn't want to give an appropriate light reading. Does anyone have experience with this on the K5/K5II/K5IIs model cameras?</p>

<p>Regards,</p>

<p>Joe</p>

<p>Brain, I have considered the distortion factor. Currently I'm using Lightroom 3 which does not support Pentax. I need to get L4 which I understand does provide support. <br>

I rented the FA43mm lens, supposedly one of Pentax's best and wasn't impressed! I shot a picture of Deerfield pier just before sunrise and (set to the lens' hyperfocal distance at F16 - I don't normally use the highest setting due to diffraction) infinity was not sharp at all! Looking at the exact same composition shot on my Fuji GX617 with Velvia 100 showed infinity to be tack sharp. Just goes to show film isn't dead yet!<br>

I see Samyang is set to release a 24mm TS-E lens this year and if the optical quality can rival Canon's L TS-E II lenses I'd be very interested in taking a look at that.</p>

<p>I could use some help... I purchased the Pentax K-5 IIs last November and love the camera, only I'm looking for a good landscape lens from the Zeiss family to add to my kit. I've looked at many prime focal lengths from 18mm - 50mm. I've noticed it is hard to find Zeiss lenses that fit the Pentax K mount but I'm willing to work around this.<br>

What I'd like help with is what focal length is BEST for landscapes <strong>(WAIT, before you answer, first READ HOW I plan to use the lens...)</strong><br>

I'm looking at using this lens primarily for panoramic landscape shots where I will mount the camera on a Gimble Head (vertically) and pan and stitch multiple shots. As such, wide focal lengths like the 18mm and 21mm would be far too wide for what I'm looking to do. 50mm seems more appropriate, since the lens and camera will be on it's side and will include much more detail than a standard 2x3 composition.<br>

My main concern is if I buy a 35mm or 50mm lens, what is the best Zeiss lens (in this focal range) for maximum depth of field and sharp edge-to-edge images?<br>

Your assistance is much appreciated.</p>

<p>I could use some help... I purchased the Pentax K-5 IIs last November and love the camera, only I'm looking for a good landscape lens from the Zeiss family to add to my kit. I've looked at many prime focal lengths from 18mm - 50mm. I've noticed it is hard to find Zeiss lenses that fit the Pentax K mount but I'm willing to work around this.<br>

What I'd like help with is what focal length is BEST for landscapes <strong>(WAIT, before you answer, first READ HOW I plan to use the lens...)</strong><br>

I'm looking at using this lens primarily for panoramic landscape shots where I will mount the camera on a Gimble Head (vertically) and pan and stitch multiple shots. As such, wide focal lengths like the 18mm and 21mm would be far too wide for what I'm looking to do. 50mm seems more appropriate, since the lens and camera will be on it's side and will include much more detail than a standard 2x3 composition.<br>

My main concern is if I buy a 35mm or 50mm lens, what is the best Zeiss lens (in this focal range) for maximum depth of field and sharp edge-to-edge images?<br>

Your assistance is much appreciated.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Stephen, Kerry said it best! I used to live in Los Angeles and my wife convinced me to move to Austin, TX 1.5 years ago. While Austin is a nice place to live, the landscape capital of the world it aint! Brown trees, brown grass and half-dead overgrowth are the result of several years of drought here. Not to mention, Lake Travis, our largest and nearest body of water is only 50% full last I checked which isn't the prettiest when it's half empty.<br>

Focusing my efforts on landscape and architectural photography these days, we've now discussed moving to Redmond, WA so that I can be in an area that serves my work and allows me the ability to travel to scenic destinations without a 3000 mile journey. Art Wolfe is a world renowned photographer and calls Seattle home. Arizona, Utah, Central to Northern California and yes the granddaddy of them all.... Australia. Other than that... stay where you are and get out and start shooting for christ's sake!</p>

<p>Adorama sells a B+W 77mm Center Filter which will work on the Fuji Gx617 90mm and 105mm lenses. This filter can also be used on other panoramic cameras using a step ring (about $10). The B+W version is expensive, over $500! I almost bought a camera without this and changed my mind and acquired a GX617 that came with the Fuji factory center filter and focusing screen. The focus screen is difficult to use, even with a focusing cloth, as the image is upside down and the light does not distribute well enough to clearly focus using it. I typically shoot images at either infinity or close to it and if I have subjects close in the foreground, I back my camera up to compensate for the hyperfocal distance. It's not perfect but the image plane being as wide as it is makes up for minor sharpness in the foreground.</p>

<p>Regarding Costco I agree! This is for checking your work or basic poster prints, not gallery work or something you'd want to show to a discriminating client. I've printed at Costco from files processed in CS5 using a 27" iMac with a high resolution screen and the prints were no where near what they should have been. It may have been the Costco I was using but honestly, I was not impressed at all.</p>

<p>I own and shoot a Fuji GX617 with 105mm lens. I predominantly shoot Velvia, E-100 and some Portra film. I just recently purchased a Howtek 4000 Drum Scanner for $900, including all software, hardware, oil, gel, cleaners, wipes, tape, etc. The previous owner tested it for me and showed me the ropes of using the machine and offered to further tutor me by phone. I did a bit of research before buying this one and the consensus was the for my budget, there were few options that could match the quality of a drum scanner. Perhaps with the advancement of techincally and a fatter wallet, some others can afford the latest-greatest virtual drum or flatbed scanner. I know I'm just excited to get home and start scanning my book of slides.</p>

<p>Roman, what camera / lens combination were you using for this image? The color contrast looks correct but the image appears unsharp. Also, why are you using 800ISO here. Why not 400ISO?</p>

<p>Thanks for the input! I just finished 1300 miles of Northern, CA driving and have about a week of shooting let to do in Los Angeles area before I head back to Austin, TX and didn't want to develop my chrome here. The exposed rolls (about 15) only sat in my car about two days in mild weather, while driving. Now in my mother-in-laws fridge for the next week.</p>

<p>Astia is for shooting people, it brings out color in skin tones best. Chrome films like Velvia and Provia are for landscapes and architecture. Currently, Fuji makes Velvia 50 and 100F. I've shot Kodak E100G and it's also a great slide film for landscapes.<br>

If you're shooting a Hassy 500 or H series camera your format will either be 6x4.5 or 6x6. These cameras use 120 or 220 roll film. 35mm film is consumer based. 120 is prosumer and professional based. Size of film is predicated by your camera.<br>

I like Velvia the best and Koda E100 is a close second for landscapes. Provia is OK but not as saturated for Blue/Green like Velvia. Provia will produce better reds in some situations. Again, you have to start with what you're shooting: architecture, models, landscapes, daytime, civil twilight... it all makes a difference in type and speed of film.</p>