Tech System Built around IQx50 / CMOS back

[Bryan Stephens]

The other 'camera bag' : http://www.getdpi.com/gallery/files/1/1/7/image_942546.jpeg :ROTFL:

That one is a bit tough to carry on though... :grin:

 

[Ken_R]

If I've learnt only one thing after years of photography and GAS it's that you should only buy the best lenses (and tripods/heads). Cameras/backs come and go but the best glass lasts a long long time and rewards you whenever you use it.

Words of Wisdom

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Pretty much my way of shooting, too. I sort of look for a subject and than for a vantage point. I want features in landscape into a match, or getting around obstacles. Each vantage point gives a perspective, that is specific to that vantage point. Moving around changes that perspective. This walking around I often do without even removing the camera from the backpack.

Once vantage point is established I set up the tripod and select the lens. With 24x36 I mostly shoot zooms, so finding the right lens is easy.

On MFD I did pretty well with five lenses, like 40, 50, 80, 120 and 180. Now I shoot 40, 60, 100, 120 and 180 for some practical reasons. Often, when a lens is not wide enough I stitch, a technique I call uncropping.

Best regards
Erik

The way to make images is very personal, there's no "right" way to do it. The way I work is that I choose where to stand and where to look, the I pick focal length to "crop" the view to place the corners where I want them. With tightly spaced focal lengths I can get very close my desired framing and often enough not having to crop the image in post-processing, the one-shot-perfect feeling I find particularly pleasing. That's one key reason I like the 4:3 format of the MFD so much more than 3:2 format of 135, as most my compositions is generally suited for 4:3 or even 5:4.

The recent image below for example:

View attachment 114753

is shot with a SK90 with tilt. To get the reflection where I wanted required me to put the camera at an exact position, I couldn't move backwards or forwards to make the corners of the frame fit another focal length, 90 was (almost) spot on (yes I do crop when needed, I'm not a no-cropping-fundamentalist ). Although I could have shot it with my 72 and then crop, shooting at 90 and getting to the final composition directly in the shot is more pleasing to me.

It's often romanticized how limitations in your gear, such as having only one or two lenses, or a slow camera, or even shooting film, makes you focus on your work better and make better images. I think it's much truth in that, but what works is personal. I think the slowed down shooting process, that it really takes a few minutes minimum to make a shot (you can't shoot the Linhof Techno hand-held), does help me to focus on the good images. However I don't think that reducing the number of focal lengths would help me and my shooting style in any way, to me the only difference would be that I would get a bit less pleasing shooting experience as I would have to rely more on post-processing cropping, and cropping would lower resolution of my images of course. Reducing the number of focal lengths is to me a question about economy and how much weight I can carry, not an artistic choice. I do understand that it can be for others, it doesn't work that way for me though.

Here's another one:

View attachment 114754

This was shot with the SK120. I had to stand at that position to get the geometric elements align the way I wanted, and I had to have the corners there to get the composition where I wanted. Ideal focal length would have been 150mm, but I just had a 120 and a 180. What I do then is that I shoot anyway and I crop, and cry a bit as the resolution is reduced :scry:

That's my personal relation to lenses... I'm sure the lens manufacturers would love more photographers think like me on this part