Charles, thanks for the laugh.
Dan, Steven, very nice images.
Charles, thanks for the laugh.
Dan, Steven, very nice images.
My first post here and my first shot with
RODENSTOCK HR DIGARON-W 4/40 , f11 , HELIOPAN pol-filter .
5mm vertical shift . HASSELBLAD CFV-50 . Slight crop due to vignetting by too much shading from LEE universal shade .
Regards . Jürgen .
A couple from our New Hampshire workshop, processed at the airport while I'm waiting for the plane. Both shot with my Arca, both from bridges looking down:
70mm HR, 2 sec @ f11 with 1/2º of tilt and 15mm fall, processed in C1:
70mm HR, 30 sec @ f11 using a 6-stop IR-cut ND filter, 2º tilt and 20mm fall, processed in C1:
Jack, #2 is outstanding... I am cold just looking at it
#2 is just great .
I understand tilt in landscape photography but Not a shift of 20 mm .
I Never used shift with landscape photgraphy .
Am I missing something here ?
Regards . Jürgen .
Well, I am ofcourse guessing here, but since Jack was standing on a bridge looking down, he simply didn't want the 'looking-down' image but rather straighten up the trees and more as if he was on the ground.
I use rise quite often when in a forest.
Nice, Jack. Especially like the second.
Here's one of mine, from this week after our first snowfall:
Fall color in transition, near Ketchum, Idaho. 2 shot stitch, Cambo/47xl/P45+
Thanks guys, and we missed you on this one Stu!
Jurgen, Dan and Graham are exactly correct -- since I was up on a bridge, I used fall to "lower" the viewpoint in the image. Had I wanted to see more of the trees and kept them vertical, I would have used rise. I regularly use small amounts of shift and/or rise/fall to adjust my composition
A comment about live view and a crop from the second image above...
I've started using live view to focus in the field with tilts and I can tell you it works amazingly well. The hardest thing to get used to is the 2 or 3 frame per second refresh. So you go to 100% view, make a small adjustment then pause to let the frame refresh and see if it's better or worse, repeating as necessary until everything is right. Another tip: you can white balance the live view image by droppering it while it is playing and this helps the preview significantly. Note that this WB does NOT affect the image, only the live preview color balance. Anyway, it was live view that let me nail the precise focus and tilt for this image, which required a few very slight iterative tilt and focus tweaks to get the foreground and background rocks in optimal focus -- if you've ever worked a view camera under the hood with a loupe on the GG, then you've done these these tilt and focus tweak iterations. It works the same way here, just with the slight pauses.
This is a crop from the lower center part of the larger foreground rock. Keep in mind this is a 30 second exposure and I am on a small bridge that vibrates along with 4 other shooters, and a breeze is blowing, AND this is nearer the outer edge of the lens' IC. Granted it's not perfect, a few of the leaves are obviously being moved by the slight breeze and there are a few hot pixels, and I'm into an area of the IC where I'm getting some resolution falloff -- but considering all of that, it's still a pretty impressive result IMHO:
Understood . Thanks for putting me right .
With the HR70 and your IQ180 , the amount of fall you used must have been rather at the limit of the IC . Some vignetting ?
Disregarding the vibration of the bridge and the blowing breeze , I think the crop is very good . What a DB ! ! !
Ok.No money , no honey .
Regards . Jürgen .
Yes indeed, and that was one of the points! With 20mm of fall, I am very near the usable edge of the IC, and that edge IS at the bottom of the image and why I cropped form there to show how good that "bad" area can be!
Re vignetting, the 70 does have some, but less than the shorter lenses; less extreme light falloff is a side advantage of having a retro-focus design lens over a symmetrical design lens. In the case of the 70, the IC essentially remains usably sharp to about the last 2mm before it cuts off (vignettes totally black), and this area is maybe 1 stop lower than center field, easily corrected in the LCC. Interestingly, with the 23 HR the usable resolution is also very close to the cutoff point, giving you about 4mm rise/fall and 2mm shift capability with the 23 on the IQ180 sensor -- but that lens has serious enough light falloff you need a CF at all times. My 40 HR gets unusable resolution-wise maybe 6 or 8mm before it cuts completely off, and that point is about 2 stops lower than center field -- hence a CF is probably a good idea, but so far for me, C1's LCC has handled it incredibly well and I have not felt the need for a dedicated CF on the 40. Lastly, sometimes the extra illumination in an otherwise useless resolution part of the circle is an advantage as it may be in a non-critical part of the frame; and thus gives you some extra shift room for composing purposes... Make sense?
Just for fun, here is another crop from the extreme lower LH side of the frame above. Note that you can start to see the resolution "smearing" as it approaches the last usable limits of the IC. Note that I cannot define the exact point where resolution becomes unusable, as it will vary from user to user and even image to image. For me, this is still usable resolution for an extreme corner even if I printed this to 50", and I would probably even accept less in an image like this. However, if this were at the main foreground rock above, I would not be satisfied except for some quite smaller print sizes:
It would also be interesting to see the results of the same frame with less rise/fall but with the camera inclined, pointed to the subjet + perspective corrected in C1.
IQ would have been better at the corners and maybe not really worse in the center.
Don't like to do that with my Cambo in Architecture (pixels lost when correcting and reframing + whole shape of the buildings modified) but for landscape isn't it the way to go ? Using rize/fall just to the limit of the acceptable IC starts to look 'old fashioned' sometimes compared to C1 performance (no offense !)
Next, I'd arguye with you on the old fashioned look, but then we each have our own opinions. Personally, I will take the shoot it right to begin with tech method method over C1 or CS transformations 8-days a week
I am using the WRS + 35mm SK and the IQ 180. Yes I know, not the best combination !
With the latest release of C1 it seems that 10mm rize/fall still can be corrected with color cast when using a center filter (former C1 version gave strange results at 7mm).
Regarding sharpness 6-7mm maybe is the limit (still have to check that for myself) and with such narrow play for rize/fall, aiming the camera at the subjects can be a necessity.
But I'm quite pleased with this combination of 7mm rize/fall plus aiming if needed. C1 does a really good job correcting perspective. It's quick to shoot like this and maybe more importantly let me dare to be more flexible with framing. Creativity thanks it.
But what's also important is than I can delay the purchase of a 40mm HR and save some money (at least temporarily) !
Still struggling with getting good color off my Leaf Aptus II 7 and C1 so for the mean time Fall Colors in B&W
Mt. Wilson in Colorado, Sinar arTec, 135mm, 15mm rise F11 20th sec
Any image you link outside too the URL needs to end in .jpg, or .tiff, gif, etc. It cannot be an attachment from another location or it won't code -- you'll see it but we cannot. Try using our site -- you have a free gallery as a member, and for sure you can load it here and it will be visible. Here is a tutorial on how to use the GetDPI album: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=54
Definitely works as a B&W
i like the auto correction that C1 can do, especially with the IQ back recording pitch & rotation information. However, you're flushing bits or stretching them to correct the image plus as Jack mentioned you really have to shoot pretty loose. Getting it right at capture time certainly has its advantages both in terms of ultimate image quality and reduction of post processing time & effort.
Although I'm guessing that there is some wonderful fall aspen color in the original scene, it is fantastic as a B&W. Very nice!
Thanks Jack and Jammie..
2 more this time in color.... Same setup arTec and 135mm lens.
www.kuau.com1 Member(s) liked this post
Those are very nice -- and IMHO, either of those would look great in B&W too!
Re 23 HR : I was quite surprised to hear that there is Room left for movements on your fill frame sensor.
Do you have image samples?
It sounds like this lens needs a CF at all times- even when not shifted?
The 32 HR is actually quite good unshifted in that regard I only use a CF when I push movements to the limit
How about lean flare on the 23HR.
I can't make up my mind if I should ad this lens to 32HR which got decent movements thinking thaT without movements I can almost approach the same FoV with the 32 HR shifted.
That's why I am surprised to hear that you can shift a few mm
I only tested the 23 on another participant's camera, so have no images of my own. We confirmed those movements before corner clipping with the CF mounted. Hopefully a few of the folks that shot with it will post some exemplars. Falloff is extreme, so the CF is needed all the time. From what I could see, the very corners go a tad smeary at full shift/rise, but overall lens is very good. It is EXTREMELY wide, like about a 15mm rectilinear on 35 DSLR.
My gut is that if you want extreme wide the 23 will be loved. OTOH, if you prefer slightly more moderate wides, the 32 may be a better overall choice. It certainly has more shift capability. The 32 is about a 20/21 effective in 35 DSLR terms.
I shoot often in congested places in china and sometimes miss a wider lens than my 32 HR
I sold the 28 XL after upgrading to the IQ180 since it became useless and I feel I am left with no other choice to go wider for those special occasions where in theist I used my 17 TSE which is quite amazing given it's FoV and price ( in comparison to the 23HR that is :-))
Not that many folks got this HR23 so it's hard to get info
Two shots from the New England workshop. Alpa 12 SWA, 47mm, P20+.
1 Member(s) liked this post
I shot a lot with the 23mm on the Cambo. I will have images posted maybe this weekend. Still sailing in Bermuda at the moment. Have to catch up but i will say this the 23mm is sharp as can be. Extremely nice lens and yes I got about 3 to 4mm of movement with it.
Geez downloading 600 emails at the moment. This is nuts, hope its at least 500 jobs. LOL
Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
Very nice images! That morning's light was special for some reason
Really nice feel to your images, and I like your foreground elements. Looks cold!
Jack - yes, the light was great that morning and you nailed it in the image you posted in the MF images thread. I bet the light was even better the morning we left but sleep was needed!
Jamie - it was cold, even colder than it looks, but I've been out in a lot worse!
Arca RM3di, 23mm Rodenstock, 3s, f/11, ISO 35, IQ180 All movements zeroed; Cropped.
Image made during New England (NH) Workshop. Charles
Very nice! Was that the "moss forrest" area?
Charles - nice shot and location.
I'm wondering whether you had the end of the path in the center of uncropped shot because it looks like you perhaps had the same pink center flare that Ed Cooley exhibited with his 23mm HR shot?? It's hard to tell obviously with small web images:
Jack & Graham, thanks for your comments. Yes, that image was made in the "moss forest area". This was among the first images I made with the 23 mm and the light and reflections seemed very tricky; I did not have a lens hood and don't really know yet how to shade this lens; it is so wide I probably have more risk getting my "shade" into the picture than the risk of flare. Graham, the end of the path was very near the center of the original image and there may be some slight "pink" flare in the original. I am finding both the 40 mm and 23 mm Rodenstock have a tendency to flare there; that flare is very well controlled with the compendium shade, but I was not using a shade when this shot was made. Charles
This is another image made at the New Hampshire Workshop with the Rodenstock 23mm; it's the full image with no cropping; all positions are zeroed. Charles
Lovely composition and use of the wide lens Charles! You captured the essence of that pond on that particular afternoon. I want that lens
Nicely done Charles! For the uncropped image with the 23, is the lcc corrected for light falloff at 100% and was there any vignetting added?
Thanks cmb & Jack. I don't have good notes or memory on the pond image, but there was no was no intentional vignetting. It may be I had about 4mm of rise on this image in an effort to avoid some culverts in the foreground of my picture. I am learning I need to keep much better records. I also have some "technical" issues with my lcc on this image. When I ran the lcc the following message appeared: "severe spots in lens cast calibration may only be partially corrected." I believe I did check the box for 100% light fall off...but I have to admit I need to be more focused on all aspects of my workflow for the 23 mm (and technical camera in general). I will start with an examination and cleaning of my sensor and lcc card. I picked up a small memo booklet for more careful note taking on my upcoming Arizona trip. Charles
I call this one "New Hampshire Blue". It is probably too blue for most tastes...but I am posting it anyway! RM3di, 23 mm Rodenstock, IQ180. I am not sure about the other settings; they were probably: ISO 35, 3s, f11 with no movements. The sky was cropped slightly to get the horizon off center. Charles
Don, I like the emphasis on the reflections in your compsition and the colors are really nice. Charles