The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun with MF images - ARCHIVED - FOR VIEWING ONLY

Status
Not open for further replies.

dick

New member
Are you suggesting shooting a tighter crop with a longer lens or longer lens/stitching?
Either or both.
I love the image and the immensity and grandeur it portrays ... I can easily envision it as a 8 or 10 foot wide print ... breathtaking if it has the resolution to hold up (which with the p45 probably would be pretty good).
It is a lovely image as it is, and stitched and printed 16 foot wide it would be awesome - partly as you could approach the picture and enjoy "pictures within the picture".

With a 200, 300 or 400mm lens you could also get wonderful pictures in atmospheric conditions that gave you the definition in the distance.
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
Either or both.
It is a lovely image as it is, and stitched and printed 16 foot wide it would be awesome - partly as you could approach the picture and enjoy "pictures within the picture".

With a 200, 300 or 400mm lens you could also get wonderful pictures in atmospheric conditions that gave you the definition in the distance.
Using a longer lens only affects FoV as captured on the sensor. It won't change the perspective/compression/atmospheric conditions, it just changes how much of the scene is recorded. Stitching with a longer lens will yield an identical image with perhaps more detail. Shooting smaller FoV with a telephoto will also not yield any substantial difference than just cropping this image, other than detail.

While the additional detail may offer some additional depth and clarity, it really would only be visible in large prints, certainly not in a web jpeg, but the overall image would be basically the same regarding perspective/atmospheric conditions/compression.
 
Last edited:

Thierry

New member
Yes, it would not even change de DoF, at same f-stop and same scale of reproduction.

Thierry

Using a longer lens only affects FoV as captured on the sensor. It won't change the perspective/compression/atmospheric conditions, it just changes how much of the scene is recorded. the overall image would be basically the same regarding perspective/atmospheric conditions/compression.
 

dick

New member
Using a longer lens only affects FoV as captured on the sensor. It won't change the perspective/compression/atmospheric conditions, it just changes how much of the scene is recorded. Stitching with a longer lens will yield an identical image with perhaps more detail. Shooting smaller FoV with a telephoto will also not yield any substantial difference than just cropping this image, other than detail.

While the additional detail may offer some additional depth and clarity, it really would only be visible in large prints, certainly not in a web jpeg, but the overall image would be basically the same regarding perspective/atmospheric conditions/compression.
MF is mostly about detail... but a longer lens would not give you proportionally more real res, if res (in the far distance) was limited by haze.

We were talking about 12 foot enlargements - not web jpegs.

Stitching can give less improvement than the increase you might hope for from the increase in pixel count... due to straightening pan-and-stitch images or decreased lens edge res with shift-and-stitch images... but my initial comment was mostly about getting a narrower angle of view with increased detail.
 

Christopher

Active member
I think taste is an important point. I really like both, wide and closer landscapes. It always depends on the subject. I would not change anything about the shot.

I try to stitch when ever possible. It just gives me a way to print large and show amazing details even in 1,5 by 3 meters.
 

dick

New member
Yes, it would not even change de DoF, at same f-stop and same scale of reproduction.

Thierry
Yes - I did know that DOF is very similar for the same reproduction ratio - and this is mostly relevant for macro, but I have just put the numbers into the Rags DOF calculator, and, at 20 miles, the DoF for 75mm square with a 210mm lens is almost identical to that for 50mm square with a 70mm lens.

But the near focus limit is 0.114 miles, so, in this picture, with no important subject matter that close, you could manage without tilt to get the foreground in focus!
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
MF is mostly about detail... but a longer lens would not give you proportionally more real res, if res (in the far distance) was limited by haze.

We were talking about 12 foot enlargements - not web jpegs.

Stitching can give less improvement than the increase you might hope for from the increase in pixel count... due to straightening pan-and-stitch images or decreased lens edge res with shift-and-stitch images... but my initial comment was mostly about getting a narrower angle of view with increased detail.
No argument with any of this, I was just trying to clarify your original point which sounds like it was about alternative compositions more than anything else.

Challenge with MF to get those tighter compositions, compression, and atmospheric effects etc. is there are not many good lens options.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top