Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10 »
 on: Today at 08:58:40 AM 
Started by Quentin - Last post by Theodoros
Quote from: torger link=topic=93088.msg758156#msg758156 date= ???1409651042
Well, Brent has described a technique that works. It's up to others to decide if it's too cumbersome or not. Some people have even used scanning backs for landscape, which is even more cumbersome and limiting concerning required shooting conditions. Personally I even find stitching too cumbersome to be enjoyable but yet it's a popular technique among many.

In any case it's up to the reader to decide, you can't just present your own opinion as some sort of fact, which of course becomes insulting to people that is using this technique successfully.
1. It doesn't work! ...It can't work right. If the process result is worst than "just shooting" with a traditional method, it doesn't mean that there are ways around what causes the worst result, it simply means that "pigs can't fly"!  Cheesy
For one to decide if it's cumbershot or not he first has to see if he is interested or not to invest in trying it... Those kind of info are the ones that one expects to read in forums... As a result, if one trusts a forum and reads that "pigs may fly", he may as well ride his pig and try to to see the world above the clouds riding it... That's not the purpose which those that share their passion for photography should be after!  Wink Otherwise one shouldn't be taught things under lecturer supervision in universities, he should be left to "decide for himself" and just be given the degree!  Roll Eyes After all, we are all told here without one presenting a result of the method.... (which I believe it doesn't exist)  Grin

Scanning backs are different to multishot! Scanning backs don't fail if there is movement in the scene or the set up... They present it as distortion which in small volumes may be used as an effect... but again, that's a totally different subject than the topic here!  Huh

 on: Today at 08:58:08 AM 
Started by beebibi - Last post by melchiorpavone
Well, I was at a seminar on Saturday by renowned landscape photographer Jeremy Walker, who is sponsored by Lee Filters.

He was quite open about colour casts in Lee filters - and gave advice for reducing them - e.g. setting WB to 10,000 when using the Big Stopper.

Different manufacturers' ND filters do have different colour casts and, oddly, some of my "Chinese Cheapies" have less cast than my ultra-expensive Lee ones. But I don't worry too much (and don't use anything other than Auto WB on the camera when shooting landscapes) as I can correct the cast very easily in Lightroom.

I would say use the B+W brand. German stuff.

 on: Today at 08:44:42 AM 
Started by JoeKitchen - Last post by torger
I agree that the moving sensor standard is a problem.

The SK28 is a mystery though, it was released in 2011, the P65+ was released in 2008, and by 2011 there was many other backs with Dalsa's 6um technology. Schneider should have known that it would not work well. Maybe it was designed for the future, but unfortunately no sensors with desired properties appeared? Either that or they did not actually test it together with modern backs at the time, which seems strange to omit.

I think 49x37mm was a good size for tech cams, but understandable the back makers had to move to full-frame 645 as they have 645 cameras.

On the other hand, large format film also had various film sizes to work with, mainly 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10. 44x33, 49x37 and 54x41 is tighter than that. More than varying sensor size I think the varying color cast / crosstalk sensitivity is an issue. This is a technology issue though hard to overcome. Pressed by the 135 systems and also providing an argument for upgrade MF backs needs to put more pixels in there, leading to smaller pixels, leading to higher crosstalk, making traditional large format wide angle designs impossible.

In a way I think the lens manufacturers should have seen this coming, a layman could have guessed it.

I don't think a company like Schneider have lost much money on the SK28 design though. This type of lens is probably quite fast from design to production, and production is more or less "made to order", so maybe that's an explanation why the lens design does not seem to be that thought through.

 on: Today at 08:40:43 AM 
Started by Remo Nonaz - Last post by Remo Nonaz
My system has had issues ever since I upgraded my CPU from an Intel Sandy Bridge i5 to an Ivy Bridge i7. I like the performance of the i7 so I finally threw in the towel and upgraded my motherboard from a Z68-based board to a more compatible Z77-based board. For good measure I also reloaded Windows 7 so that I have a fresh OS running on the new board.

Most people believe that reloading your OS requires that you wipe your C drive, reload the OS and then have to reload all your applications. Not so. If you do the reload as an 'upgrade' all the applications, data and settings will be preserved. There are a couple of tricks involved and I tried this on a cloned C drive before doing it on my live drive. A full set of instructions is available at

While I've not had a chance to fully evaluate the new board, it appears that all is well and the new motherboard / OS are doing fine. All my applications are present and no system settings appear to have changed. This process is time consuming. The 'upgrade' process takes about three hours and then the service packs have to be added, which takes another two hours or so. Still, it is much better than having to reload all your applications and then try to figure out how to get all the settings back to how you like them.

 on: Today at 08:35:57 AM 
Started by Mark_Seng - Last post by marc aurel
thanks, from time to time i use a polarizer and a gray filter, but they are size 82.
Do you know if it is possible to use this size of filters with contax lens? a 82-70mm step down ring should work, or am i wrong?

I use my 82mm filters (which i bought for use on the TS-E 24mm) on the PC-Distagon. They work fine. But I would not use a step-up ring from the 70mm filter thread of the lens itself.
With my PC-Distagon there came a lens hood with a filter thread with 86mm diameter. So I bought an 86mm to 82mm step-down ring. There is no vignetting which could happen with the other solution (although I am not sure, you could try).

I agree with others here that the PC-Distagon is a great lens - I love it as much as the TS-E 24mm. It's not as sharp wide open, but at f8 or f11 it's as good as the TS-E in the centre and even better in the shifted corners. There is some distortion which should be corrected for architectural use. But you can use the free Alpa Plugin for Photoshop - they have a profile that works perfect (if you have noted or can reconstruct how much shift in which direction you used).

 on: Today at 08:33:17 AM 
Started by Dave (Isle of Skye) - Last post by Patricia Sheley
From our small speck on the timeline we find ourselves pointing to the damages, to self and others in the interminable wars for cause...yet here as elsewhere the lessons are not forgotten (would have needed to have been learned/internalized to have done that). No matter the outcome it will be down to good people going about an attempt at honest life hoisted by the petards of others...

 on: Today at 08:16:16 AM 
Started by randal21 - Last post by Damir

You may have right regarding OS compatibility, this have to be additionally explored.

As a matter of fact I still run my Z3100 on Windows XP. My Z is connected to computer that I use only for printing. On that machine there are only software for printing, nothing else. It works perfect all of the time therefore I never consider to upgrade it, I just upgrade software that I use.

Anyway this is still wining combination, photographers that want high quality prints on matte paper are moving to me from printing services with new Canon and Epson printers. Recently I have situation in which one of my acquaintance, well known graphic designer, and less known photographer ask me to print some photos. He performed test, although I didn't know it at that time. He gave same 3 pictures to printing service with new Canon machine, new Epson machine and to me. Later he admitted that he did not consider me seriously as I have old printer which he consider outdated, but somehow he decided to give me a chance as I help him to organize his first photography exhibition. He was astonished by quality of prints, and decided to print entire exhibition on my Z. When I saw the prints from other services I was surpriseed with lack of fine details, color cast and low contrast. It may be that they do not operate their printers in correct manner, but they are experienced professionals, so I wonder how it happened.

I have seen many times prints from other machines and I always like my Z print more than any other if they are on matte paper, and especially if they are black and white. This machine may be slow, may have some quirks, may lack proper support but in my opinion it is still printer that make top quality prints. As I already mentioned I like Epson prints more than that of my Z when they are made on photo paper.

I also need to mention fact that I use Z for making profiles for all other printers that I use. If one day Z stop printing I will keep it as machine for calibration if he continue to work that way.

 on: Today at 08:06:57 AM 
Started by JoeKitchen - Last post by Enda Cavanagh
I think the problem for the lens manufacturers also is that there isn't a constant for them to work to, as in the sensors mostly settling around the 49 x 37mm size for a number of years than moving towards larger sizes with micro lenses and now back down to a 44 x 33mm CMOS sensor. They are a relatively small company after all. I would love to see a more future proof, more compact and possibly cheaper wide angle Schneider solution though. The 35mm which I love does need to be updated for sure. The 28mm is a great lens on certain backs. I use it on the H3D 39 and have used it on the H5D 50 and love it but the larger sensor backs and newer CMOS sensor backs are a no go area for it. It's one of the reasons I haven't upgraded my back and instead bought the Sony A7r and Canon TS lenses as a second camera system.

 on: Today at 08:00:02 AM 
Started by beebibi - Last post by Paul2660
As others have reported, the Lee system will work on any circular filter other than a CLPL.  If you put a Lee wide angle adapter ring on in front of a CLPL, you may never get it off, since the CLPL will rotate and not allow the Lee ring to come off. 

I personally have long ago quit using UV filters, as I don't see any benefit, unless you are looking for a protective layer in front of your lens. 

The use of ND's for me is simply to allow a slower shutter speed mainly for water, and in these shots I also will try to have a CLPL on as it will cut off the glare from the light on rocks, and also on the surface of the water, allowing most time for a much more pleasing subject. 

If I want a 5 second exposure at iso 50, in good outdoor light, most times, I will shoot with a ND 0.9 (3 stops of reduction in light) and CLPL which gives between 1.5 to 2 stops.  This combined with F8 to F11 aperture will give me the shutter speed I am looking for without blowing the light on the water. 

You can easily test a ND for color cast by holding it up to a pure white plastic, like ones used for LCC captures.  Many times you will see a slight blue cast (OK for me) or a reddish cast  (not OK for me as it's very hard to correct).  This cast will get worse the longer the exposure. 

Lee resin ND both solid and grad are pretty clean of color casts from what I can tell, and if you see any, it tend to be on the side. 

I tend to use the Lee wide angle hood, with a 105mm CLPL installed and one filter 2mm slot for an ND. 

Interesting comments from PhotoEcosse on Lee's comments on the blue cast issues with the Big stopper as it's definitely got one.

One other note, as you get towards 20 second exposures, maybe even 10, you are going to start seeing IR pollution unless your ND has a IR cut built in.  You can find this in the more expensive Tiffin and Schneider filters among others. 


 on: Today at 07:57:25 AM 
Started by Quentin - Last post by Enda Cavanagh
Personally I would go with an Arca Swiss system. I have used a Cambo system before and it was great but the Arca is in another league. I personally use the RL3D but if weight is an issue than you can select from one of the other R series cameras. I prefer the RL3D because I use a lot of shift. I get up to 40mm rise for example which I have used. Another poster mentioned that the 200MS doesn't have micro lenses so therefore you have a much wider elections of lenses to choose from. I use the Schneider 28mm, 35mm, and 47mm and the Rodenstock 90mm HR Digaron-SW on a Hasselblad H3D back/ Cambo RL3D system.
The 28mm should work fine on the 200 MS (BUT DOUBLE CHECK WITH DEALERS). It has a huge image circle allowing a lot of movement, is tack sharp and minimal distortion. It is expensive but still much cheaper than the Rodie 32mm. The Rodie 40mm is another great lens I would go for. Again tack sharp and large image circle. The Schneider 60mm is supposed to be great and the Rodie 90mm is a fantastic lens. One of the sharpest out there. I do love my Schneider 35mm. It SHOULD work fine on the 200MS. It's the equivalent of a 24mm in 35mm format and is just a nice focal length for landscape and architecture

The cambo focusing ring (EDIT: Oops. Typo. I meant the Arca Swiss Focus Ring.  Embarrassed) is the most accurate on the market. Combined with the module you get ridiculous accuracy and is very quick and easy to use once it's calibrated. I love how I can remove the back to quickly change it to portrait or visa versa, without having to touch the tripod. I love how the lens is always fixed when shifting for easier stitching. I love how I have tilt built into the camera and not the lens (IE all lenses  therefore will have tilt. No extra premium to pay) I love how I can remove the front plate of the camera to get swing instead of tilt and I love the viewfinder with zoom. Really great at determining quickly what lens to use.

BTW I would invest in the Arca Swiss Cube (or similar) Head. It will make your compositioning and leveling a doddle.

I do think you will be using single shot mode for the vast majority of the time if you are based in the UK but than again I do shoot multiple exposures most of the time on a regular back with foliage and the blending does look natural as long as it's relatively still. You and Bret know I'm sure how the it looks on an MS back and if you can get it right the quality would look astounding I'm sure. Good luck with your new system.

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10 »