kit laughlin
Subscriber Member
I am assembling a Sony-based setup for shooting instruments for a friend, who makes stringed instruments. Yesterday I used the 850 + the Zeiss 24-70/2.8 on tripod to shoot an expensive cello... these are hard to light (I will post examples later).
My inquiry today: considering shooting distance (under 2 metres with a 40–50mm lens), is there a clear advantage to either one of these excellent lens makers' offerings?
I am looking at the Hasselblad 40/4 or 50/4, or the Mamiya 45/2.8; the Mirex requires that I choose one or the other.
I want to be able to tilt the lens mainly (and in a close-focus, product environment with controlled lighting), and the shift will be nice for panoramas—but the table-top capacity is the most important aspect.
I am inclining to the Mamiya, only for the one-stop faster aperture for focussing.
One final question: after using the C1Pro 'focus mask' when processing yesterday's images (and being amazed at how well it works), is there any way to allow the Sony to be tethered to the MacBook Pro via this software??? I will cross post this in the image processing forum, too.
Cheers, and TIA
My inquiry today: considering shooting distance (under 2 metres with a 40–50mm lens), is there a clear advantage to either one of these excellent lens makers' offerings?
I am looking at the Hasselblad 40/4 or 50/4, or the Mamiya 45/2.8; the Mirex requires that I choose one or the other.
I want to be able to tilt the lens mainly (and in a close-focus, product environment with controlled lighting), and the shift will be nice for panoramas—but the table-top capacity is the most important aspect.
I am inclining to the Mamiya, only for the one-stop faster aperture for focussing.
One final question: after using the C1Pro 'focus mask' when processing yesterday's images (and being amazed at how well it works), is there any way to allow the Sony to be tethered to the MacBook Pro via this software??? I will cross post this in the image processing forum, too.
Cheers, and TIA