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.

P. Chong

Well-known member
Trying to capture the grandeur of the Grand Canyon...a 8 panel stitch...reduced to 1920 pixels wide...the original image, after processing is about 43000 pixels wide.

I guess images like these do not really work on the web.

 

etrump

Well-known member
Some more or less recent stuff. (My server this time)

P45 / Cambo WRS - P65 / Linhof Techno - P45 / P1 645AF

Awesome pano Christopher. The balance is too much! :thumbs:

Those birds in the sky are the perfect compliment to the balance. Jaw dropper!
 

etrump

Well-known member
Trying to capture the grandeur of the Grand Canyon...a 8 panel stitch...reduced to 1920 pixels wide...the original image, after processing is about 43000 pixels wide.

I guess images like these do not really work on the web.

Works fine on the web for me. I'll bet the prints are fantastic.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
A few with the H4D/40 and 35-90. Did a wedding in Port Sanilac Michigan on the shores of Lake Huron.

Big house on a compound with 20 people staying there ... being an early riser I just went out in the AM to do a few personal shots and play with my new 35-90 ... which I absolutely love.

I'm not a nature or landscape shooter, but must say I DO get the attraction ... it was so peaceful and almost zen like compared to the hub-bub of the wedding preparations and actual wedding itself. Getting paid to go on vacation is really cool ... LOL!

Marc
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Unfortunately this is the second image in the last week that I've seen ruined by diffraction rings.

Those annular rings in the OOF background highlights are NOT caused by diffraction (perhaps xpixel can confirm the aperture used and the ~magnification involved to confirm that there is no diffraction).

Those rings come from the moulded aspherical surfaces in the lens' elements.
See: http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b8b6f/embedtitelintern/cln_35_bokeh_en/$file/cln35_bokeh_en.pdf
 

KeithL

Well-known member
Those annular rings in the OOF background highlights are NOT caused by diffraction (perhaps xpixel can confirm the aperture used and the ~magnification involved to confirm that there is no diffraction).

Those rings come from the moulded aspherical surfaces in the lens' elements.
See: http://www.zeiss.com/c12567a8003b8b6f/embedtitelintern/cln_35_bokeh_en/$file/cln35_bokeh_en.pdf
Vivek, I'm merely an image maker and bow to your greater knowledge.

Whatever the cause, this is the second image I've seen in the last week to be ruined in this way.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Keith, I don't care what you call yourself but you are one of the artists I admire and look up to.

If you are trying to say that bokeh from Leica glass in this example suck, I agree.

It appears that sample variations may not show this annular rings. Sigma 50/1.4 lens for 35mm shows this and has been discussed with nice examples on the web elsewhere.
 

KeithL

Well-known member
Vivek, I really have no idea to the cause. The other image I looked at had come from the Pentax 645 but unfortunately the image has now been taken down from LL and I'm unsure which lens was used.

Speaking as an image maker, this aberration, whatever the cause, would - save extensive retouching - render it unusable.
 

xpixel

New member
Those annular rings in the OOF background highlights are NOT caused by diffraction (perhaps xpixel can confirm the aperture used and the ~magnification involved to confirm that there is no diffraction).
The picture was made in at almost night with 70mm, ISO160, aperture 2.5, 1/60, SF58 flash...

I like to see about the same kind of photo made with a hasselblad, phase or whatever... if there is also such a sharpness and color ... till now i think never seen here ;)
 

KeithL

Well-known member
Frankly I could care less about the camera manufacturer and I'm not about to make any kind of judgement on this web jpeg regarding sharpness or colour.

My sole concern was with the awful aberrations.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
looks like very bright pinpoint objects in the background, maybe more drops catching the light, are showing the bokeh effect
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Odd things happen with photography ... and this shot is an example whatever the cause.

If it happened always, or a lot, I'd be pretty disappointed.

IMO, apparent sharpness and color on this shot are more a function of the specular nature of the lighting, exposure level, and deep shadows as opposed to what gear was used.

-Marc
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The picture was made in at almost night with 70mm, ISO160, aperture 2.5, 1/60, SF58 flash...

I like to see about the same kind of photo made with a hasselblad, phase or whatever... if there is also such a sharpness and color ... till now i think never seen here ;)
Thanks for the details. That appears to indicate the lens is nearly diffraction limited even at f/2.5 (ie., as good as it can get).

However, there is more to an image than clarity as pointed out by Keith. While the 70mm lens may be good enough to photograph micrographs (and record all the details) from a distance, those highlights are unpleasant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top