Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 51

Thread: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

  1. #1
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    I have very strange results, which I would like to share with you.
    Recently, I was shooting a campaign. Animal protection etc. One of the shots we needed was a dog, facing back to the camera. It was huge studio with paper white background. With several 2400 Comet generators. So, there was A LOT of reflecting light for glass to fight with. I would never expect, that RZ glass will lose. Horrible loss of contrast. Canon is 10 times better. Shots below are just cropped. RZ 110 was with ZD back iso 50/f5.6. Canon iso 100/f8
    Judge yourself. Same dog position:
    Canon 85/1.2 II

    RZ 110/2.8 W

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Port Orchard, WA
    Posts
    157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    That is a case of the coatings on the RZ lenses showing their age. I find it is a fine line to walk in the studio getting the white I want while keeping the contrast. All my RZ lenses show this to some degree or another. The closer some of the reflections are to on-axis the worse it gets.

  3. #3
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Seems so.
    Strangely, same lens can hold against the sun like nothing else... Or I am biased and like how the picture is rendered

  4. #4
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Actually, to my eyes it looks as though your 110 might have internal dust, oil fogging or possibly even fungus -- I have seen that same thing with LF lenses, and it's usually a layer of foreign matter on internal elements.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Port Orchard, WA
    Posts
    157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by itsskin View Post
    Seems so.
    Strangely, same lens can hold against the sun like nothing else... Or I am biased and like how the picture is rendered

    You like how it renders

  6. #6
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Actually, to my eyes it looks as though your 110 might have internal dust, oil fogging or possibly even fungus -- I have seen that same thing with LF lenses, and it's usually a layer of foreign matter on internal elements.
    No, believe me, it's crystal clear. And I'm not a newcomer and used to care about every spec inside my glass. Shame on me

  7. #7
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by mvirtue View Post
    You like how it renders
    Ohhhhh yessss ))

  8. #8
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Step 1.
    Mask as much of the BG as possible.

    Step 2.
    Under-expose, then pull up subject with exposure, contrast and clarity, helping BG go a pure white. I recently experimented with an unintentional three- to four-stop underexposure from my 48-bit Leaf back—very impressed with the lack of noise in darker areas when processed in C1.

    Don’t miss film at all.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Port Orchard, WA
    Posts
    157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    You have to get closer to the correct white with the ZD. Been there done that.

  10. #10
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    It can be done. In post or during shooting. Just in direct comparison canon is better.

  11. #11
    Senior Member David Schneider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    509
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    The RZ 110 would have a larger field of view than the Canon 85 and you said there was a lot of lot reflecting so is it possible the RZ 100 just caught a lot more blow back from the high key background?

  12. #12
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Don't think it's the case. Canon 35 1.4 performed flawlessly

  13. #13
    Senior Member EH21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    394
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    You probably did use one, but have to ask... did you have a lens hood on both lenses? The RZ shot looks like it got more exposure than the canon too. No doubt you could pull up the black point on the RZ file and get a better looking result. These two factors alone could make up the difference you see. I'm not sure you can really compare the two files directly out of the can anyway.

  14. #14
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Most RZ hoods were made for 6x7 image areas. Hooding for the smaller image area of the ZD would help.

    But it's also very important to note here, the 110 didn't lose to the 85: the 110+ZD lost to the 85+5DII.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Dallas/Novosibirsk
    Posts
    632
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Ilya, how far dog was from b/g.

    B.c i see spill on hair, and problem with any digital back used on film camera - their guts aint used to that kind of reflective surface being inside. So every now and then - its not as much lens, but rather camera cant cope with stuff.

    I am getting this as well, every now and then. Thats why i hate to shoot 110/2.8 when model is close to reflective b/g.

  16. #16
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.


  17. #17
    Senior Member Thierry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Exactly.

    I wonder if any protection was used. Do an identical shot on a 4x5" camera without compendium and then with it mounted correctly: the difference will even be worse than the one shown between the Canon and the RZ.

    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by mediumcool View Post
    Thierry Hagenauer
    [email protected]

  18. #18
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Sorry for late reply.
    Yes. The lens was with original rubber hood. Dog was around 3-4 meters away from background.
    Bellows hud would be nice, but it doesn't change anything. As I posted earlier canon 35mm, which is MUCH-MUCH wider performed same as canon 85mm.

  19. #19
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    - Have you tried the same shot stopped down to f8-f11?
    - Can you try using a black cloth over the back & adapter in case there's a light leak somewhere?
    Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Phase One | Mamiya Leaf
    e: [email protected] | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | yaya's blog

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,083
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    6

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    So will this test making you to get rid of RZ+ZD+110? I have this camera but not same lens and no digital back and i will not get rid of it at all, i have 180 lens which is really very nice but i didn't use that combination in studio yet, also i don't have a digital back, but i am happy that i have Hasselblad, i don't need to do the test between Canon and Hasselblad, but one day if i will get a digital back to use with my RZ and say same this lens [110] then i will give it a try.

    In fact i am sure that RZ+ZD shot file will give me more room for improvement over Canon maybe, Good luck!
    Tareq

  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    99
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    You may have had better success with less light bouncing around. Perhaps you used too many generators. I typically light a single dog around 700 watt seconds and still manage to expose at ISO 100, f/13 @ 1/200 sec. I use a big or medium round softbox for the front, and a normal reflector to hit the background behind the dog. The dog is about five feet away from that background. Here is a typical resuslt: http://topdogimaging.net/blog/dual-identity
    Bob Rosinsky
    Lakeland, Florida
    www.topdogimaging.net

  22. #22
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by itsskin View Post
    Bellows hud would be nice, but it doesn't change anything. As I posted earlier canon 35mm, which is MUCH-MUCH wider performed same as canon 85mm.
    This does not seem logical to me, using comparisons between two Canon lenses to make determinations on whether bellows would or would not improve the contrast of a Mamiya lens (on a different camera and with a different sensor).

    Consider the vast amount of camera interior being flooded by light, including the default film aperture of 56 x 69.5mm (3892 sq. mm) vs the back’s much smaller 36 x 48mm sensor (1728 sq. mm). I have never used an RZ, but recall my RB as not having much in the way of flocking 20+ years ago; but film seems much more forgiving about reflections.

    I have tried to get info about the construction of the 110mm without success, but have discovered that the 140 macro has 7 elements (I had one of these lenses and still consider it the best medium format lens I have used).

    It would be interesting to test the 140mm under similar conditions. The angle of view using 3:4 crops matches the angle of the Canon 85 more closely too.
    Last edited by mediumcool; 10th September 2011 at 17:36. Reason: added word

  23. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    99
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    I really think your lighting ratios were off. The background is blowing out the subject.
    Bob Rosinsky
    Lakeland, Florida
    www.topdogimaging.net

  24. #24
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by BobDavid View Post
    I really think your lighting ratios were off. The background is blowing out the subject.
    That may well be true, Bob (and I happen to agree with you), but the point remains that the Canon came through with more contrast under the same conditions.

    And I just noticed this:

    Quote Originally Posted by itsskin View Post
    Shots below are just cropped. RZ 110 was with ZD back iso 50/f5.6. Canon iso 100/f8
    So cropped how much? As a print designer, I don’t care about a seamless background’s density except right around the subject itself (to minimise contouring); I assume the final layout would have used a white background, whether for online or print.

    So perhaps the bright[er] background was intended to cut retouching time.

  25. #25
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.



    Ran USM 30/40/0 first, for a bit of snap.

  26. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    99
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Here's a quick and dirty retouch effort. I used the RZ lens example for this. I was a little too aggressive with the dog's tail. Some dogs will sit on their tail...
    Bob Rosinsky
    Lakeland, Florida
    www.topdogimaging.net

  27. #27
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Most MFD backs produce a bit flatter file out of the camera ... leaving it up to you to work it in post the way you want it ... unless you set the defaults differently in the software ... as demonstrated by the simple adjustments others have made. Set up a default for this kind of work to recall when you need it.

    BTW, I shot with a RZ and Aptus 75s back in studio with strobes all the time ... in fact 100% of the time. Lots of white seemless and big lights. At the time I also used a Canon 1DsMKIII and L optics ... the RZ and Aptus blew away the Canon every time. I tried doing some high volume jewelry work so wanted to use the 35MM for a faster work flow ... and the Canon absolutely failed at capturing spectral highlights in high key settings.

    Never used a ZD back, so I can't comment.

    While the Canon shot is the better of the two compositionally, note that in the RZ shot the dog is leaning to camera left, revealing more of the background squarely into the lens.

    Mamiya didn't make the lens flag accessory for nothing. Personally, I use a Lee bellows shade on the RZ ... the rubber ones are a joke in situations like this.

    -Marc

  28. #28
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by mediumcool View Post
    That may well be true, Bob (and I happen to agree with you), but the point remains that the Canon came through with more contrast under the same conditions.

    And I just noticed this:



    So cropped how much? As a print designer, I don’t care about a seamless background’s density except right around the subject itself (to minimise contouring); I assume the final layout would have used a white background, whether for online or print.

    So perhaps the bright[er] background was intended to cut retouching time.
    This is the most reasonable post.
    The general idea about all this is that Canon came out better then RZ. Period. This is the first time it happened to me in comparable conditions. Yes, you can pull out RZ in post, but you can start with Canon with much better file. And this is big advantage.

    I cropped not more then 15% (top\bottom) of Canon file to make proportions the same with ZD.

    I did not use any protection for bellows and not willing to - because can just take small 5d2 and shoot with great success, instead of running around covered with dark cloth.

    Also, I didn't say anywhere I am getting rid of RZ. This is my favorite system, I just know its limit.

    And in this case MF is not giving me any headroom over Canon. It's giving me headache only for trying to reach Canon "out-of-box" performance.

    P.S. Plz, don't teach me how to shoot white BG also. BG was overexposed only for 0.5 stop metered from model position towards reflecting surface, and NOT at the surface plane. And if you shoot white BG, which came out grey... Lol, go back to school.
    Last edited by itsskin; 11th September 2011 at 10:37. Reason: spelling

  29. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    99
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    In this photo, I think there is something flawed with the technique used for lighting the subject and the set. The RZ lens amplified the error due to the coating technology not being as advanced as Canon's. Look at this as an opportunity to rethink how you would shoot the same situation next time. I think you would have been able to get a clean and contrasty result with a pre WWII era lens had you used just two lights. One with a reflector (hard light) to wash the background and the other (main light) with a soft box a few feet higher than the dog, pointed down at a 45 degree angle, with the light stand just barely to the side of the camera. If the dog fur was too dark on the side away from the main light use a a big sheet of white foam core to reflect the main light back to the dark side or use a soft fill light dialed way down. To prevent spill from the fill light, use a gobo to keep glare from hitting the lens. Photographing dogs is different than photographing human skin. A dog's coat can have areas that are as absorbant as black velvet while other areas on the same dog are more reflective than a white tin roof at high noon.
    Last edited by BobDavid; 11th September 2011 at 14:55.
    Bob Rosinsky
    Lakeland, Florida
    www.topdogimaging.net

  30. #30
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    I think the real question here is whether Ilya is willing to go through the required process to get a good file out of the RZ in a high key situation... when the canon makes it "easy". I'll agree that, in the studio, the Canon is capable of producing very nice files very easily... but given my experiences, I know the RZ is capable of better if one is willing to use the g3 or g2 bellows hood in tandem with flags in the BG lights, yada, yada.

    But, yeah, it takes more effort to get those files. For me, it's worth it... maybe not for others.

    That's how canon has made such great amounts of money... very nice results with little effort (and that definitely counts for something, especially in a higher volume situation).

  31. #31
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by itsskin View Post
    This is the most reasonable post.
    The general idea about all this is that Canon came out better then RZ. Period. This is the first time it happened to me in comparable conditions. Yes, you can pull out RZ in post, but you can start with Canon with much better file. And this is big advantage.

    I cropped not more then 15% (top\bottom) of Canon file to make proportions the same with ZD.

    I did not use any protection for bellows and not willing to - because can just take small 5d2 and shoot with great success, instead of running around covered with dark cloth.

    Also, I didn't say anywhere I am getting rid of RZ. This is my favorite system, I just know its limit.

    And in this case MF is not giving me any headroom over Canon. It's giving me headache only for trying to reach Canon "out-of-box" performance.

    P.S. Plz, don't teach me how to shoot white BG also. BG was overexposed only for 0.5 stop metered from model position towards reflecting surface, and NOT at the surface plane. And if you shoot white BG, which came out grey... Lol, go back to school.
    One small additional comment; because the Canon was shot at f8 there is more sharpness/detail in the dog’s back. I have to admit that the softness in the MF image would have driven me crazy! Not the best studio situation for focus bracketing.

  32. #32
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by BobDavid View Post
    Here's a quick and dirty retouch effort. I used the RZ lens example for this. I was a little too aggressive with the dog's tail. Some dogs will sit on their tail...
    We’ll dock you 10 points for the missing tail, Bob!


  33. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    99
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    I should have copied the tail from the Canon version and pasted it into the RZ version. Oh well. Learn and live or vice versa.
    Bob Rosinsky
    Lakeland, Florida
    www.topdogimaging.net

  34. #34
    Senior Member mediumcool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    1,478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by BobDavid View Post
    I should have copied the tail from the Canon version and pasted it into the RZ version. Oh well. Learn and live or vice versa.
    Trying to wag your way out of it?

  35. #35
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    I think it's obvious that ILya knows how to expose an image and probably doesn't need others to explain composition and technique. His original comment only suggested the difference in the two "out of the box", and for us to judge, not critique.

  36. #36
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Ah... but "out of the box" is not the same for those two systems. Out of the box on an RZ in the studio for high-key demands a bellows hood (especially with normal and wider lenses), well flagged BG lights, et al due to the older coatings.

    That's what most here seem to be saying. This has little to do with the ability to expose an image, it has to do with using the correct peripheral tools to get a camera to perform at it's highest level. That's not what happened here, IMO.

    ... and that's ok.

    Illya was very quick to criticize in another thread about someone else not getting everything they can out of the RZ/Digital platform. I'm just doing the same here. No malice or meanness, just some simple observations.

    That said... those canons do make it easy!

  37. #37
    Senior Member Thierry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    That's what I am thinking and trying to say since the begin: bellows hood is the answer here, nothing else, IMO.

    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by Shelby Lewis View Post
    Ah... but "out of the box" is not the same for those two systems. Out of the box on an RZ in the studio for high-key demands a bellows hood (especially with normal and wider lenses), well flagged BG lights, et al due to the older coatings.

    That's what most here seem to be saying. This has little to do with the ability to expose an image, it has to do with using the correct peripheral tools to get a camera to perform at it's highest level. That's not what happened here, IMO.

    ... and that's ok.

    Illya was very quick to criticize in another thread about someone else not getting everything they can out of the RZ/Digital platform. I'm just doing the same here. No malice or meanness, just some simple observations.

    That said... those canons do make it easy!
    Thierry Hagenauer
    [email protected]

  38. #38
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shelby Lewis View Post
    Ah... but "out of the box" is not the same for those two systems. Out of the box on an RZ in the studio for high-key demands a bellows hood (especially with normal and wider lenses), well flagged BG lights, et al due to the older coatings.

    That's what most here seem to be saying. This has little to do with the ability to expose an image, it has to do with using the correct peripheral tools to get a camera to perform at it's highest level. That's not what happened here, IMO.

    ... and that's ok.

    Illya was very quick to criticize in another thread about someone else not getting everything they can out of the RZ/Digital platform. I'm just doing the same here. No malice or meanness, just some simple observations.

    That said... those canons do make it easy!

    Okay, good points...I just read those threads. I'm not familiar with those older coatings on RZ lenses, so it seems it might make a difference based on the two with no flagging or bellows shade. Are there newer lens more suited for digital capture?

  39. #39
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    I will redo the test with bellows when I have time.
    But I am sure it will not help.

  40. #40
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    4,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1253

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    I noticed a few other RZ shots by the OP in the rz67 images thread that show a similar flaring effect, probably intended, due to the shot and light, but they do jump out. (in posts 9,11, even a bit in 24 (excellent image by the way))

    there is another poster showing a similar white lit bg (jumping woman, post 5) that does not show the flaring.

  41. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Port Orchard, WA
    Posts
    157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by jlm View Post
    there is another poster showing a similar white lit bg (jumping woman, post 5) that does not show the flaring.
    That would be me. As I posted earlier in this thread, I've had the same thing happen (loss of contrast) And every time it has been because I screwed up and ended up with more light closer to on-axis than I should have (badly flagged bg lights/too great a differential/etc). Any of the Canon's are more forgiving. With MF, when you screw up, you know you've screwed up.

    Someone asked earlier if new RZ lenses have better coatings, I don't know. Most of my lenses are 'W' series. I think a couple are older. I've tried to find a guide/web page that talks about all the generations of lenses but I have not succeeded.

  42. #42
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shelby Lewis View Post

    Illya was very quick to criticize in another thread about someone else not getting everything they can out of the RZ/Digital platform. I'm just doing the same here. No malice or meanness, just some simple observations.

    That said... those canons do make it easy!
    You can criticize me as hard as you want. And I really appreciate it. No sarcasm here. It really helps me grow.

    And I need to see what YOU do, to take your critics seriously.
    Sometime it is all about writing, but not doing. Yes, internet

    But please, don't compare mine work with the one I criticized

    I will criticize this kind of work any time in future, regardless who post this.
    what it has to do with "getting most of RZ system"? This is called "waste of money and time"

  43. #43
    Shelby Lewis
    Guest

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by itsskin View Post
    You can criticize me as hard as you want. And I really appreciate it. No sarcasm here. It really helps me grow.

    And I need to see what YOU do, to take your critics seriously.
    Sometime it is all about writing, but not doing. Yes, internet

    But please, don't compare mine work with the one I criticized
    I will criticize this kind of work any time in future, regardless who post this.
    what it has to do with "getting most of RZ system"? This is called "waste of money and time"
    Just search my posts... plenty out here at GetDPI already.

    shelbylewis.com (although much at this website is all "money maker" work that is more high-volume): here are few of my favorite sessions from a few years back:

    http://www.shelbylewis.com/welcome-t...portraits.html

    http://www.shelbylewis.com/welcome-t...egory/children

    http://www.shelbylewis.com/welcome-t...otography.html

    And here's a gallery of high school seniors... even though the market demands post-processing that is more heavy handed than I would do in my commercial work: http://www.shelbylewis.com/sl/

    And how about some high key work: http://www.shelbylewis.com/welcome-t...otography.html

    No need to be negative about others' work, though.
    Shelby (no smiley face added)

  44. #44
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    I think it's obvious that photographers are very emotional about their tools when one uses them enough. Perhaps the tone from ILya should be considered passionate, and any critiques should not be taken too personally. But because of ILya's passionate critique in another thread, I looked at my own portfolio again, and realized he was right! I had several that were more the software's technique then of my own creativity, or the full potential of the camera! In the photograph that he was referring to, although, a nicely composed image, it didn't seem to exploit the RZ's full potential. Having other photographers make comments on our work is a good thing, it does make us strive a wee bit more, or at least think about it. It comes from experience - if everything here is always marshmallow pillows and gumdrop rainbows how are we going to know if our photography is any good.

  45. #45
    Member JonMo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delta BC Canada
    Posts
    100
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    8

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Everyone has an opinion, all can be valid in their way.
    However; I think the practice of using another persons post tagged into their's to use as an example in a derogatory way is unacceptable.
    I'm sorry Ilya, but your use of it in this post is insulting and makes it very personal against the original photographer.
    Too far.
    Regards.

  46. #46
    Member itsskin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Beijing
    Posts
    118
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Shelby, very cool! Now I take your critics very seriously.

    And for all insulted here - this is very professional forum. If you don't want an opinion - do not post. Feel free you use my images as references for any purpose. I would gladly listen to what professionals think about my work. If it is bad - I wouldn't run away crying in hurt feeling, but rather try to understand what's wrong and say "thank you".

    The image above has nothing to do with RZ system and getting best of it. If you are sane - you should think so too. Ban me - but I really think this way and want to share my thinking with you.

  47. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,387
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by itsskin View Post
    Shelby, very cool! Now I take your critics very seriously.

    And for all insulted here - this is very professional forum. If you don't want an opinion - do not post. Feel free you use my images as references for any purpose. I would gladly listen to what professionals think about my work. If it is bad - I wouldn't run away crying in hurt feeling, but rather try to understand what's wrong and say "thank you".

    The image above has nothing to do with RZ system and getting best of it. If you are sane - you should think so too.
    I agree that this is a very professional forum and the manner in which people conduct discussions is a refreshing change to the many photography related discussion forums out there, where topics often result in pointless bashing. Your view of "Professional" is obviously very different to my view if you feel that you can talk about people's work the way you do.

    You mentioned you had a dislike to the shot posted above in another thread which is your opinion and one you are entitled to. However, to then repost in another, unrelated thread and "Bash" the image and photographer again is just plain rude!

    Criticism is good and useful but you have offered non to the Photographer in question and prefer insults.

    Quote Originally Posted by itsskin View Post
    Ban me - but I really think this way and want to share my thinking with you.
    Now this is just childish. Discussion, criticism and banter is rewarding. Bashing other photographers who are brave enough to post images is verging on bullying and one way to guarantee the OP never posts another image again.

  48. #48
    New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    looks like flare off the background

    "similar to mediumcool"

    two easy solutions are big polystyrene sheets, paint one side black and block the flash heads from the lense thus reducing flare and i generally overexpose white background by 1/2 to 1 stop anymore and the edges get a bit flared ..... oh and of course lense hood always

  49. #49
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Guys, perhaps, it might just be a language/cultural slant where tone and manner is totally missing on the internet.

    My Russian speaking pal Irakly sometime comes off that way when speaking English ... direct and without tact, often using the wrong adjectives.

    Ilya doen't like the image he referenced ... because he "feels" is isn't representative of RZ capabilities. What he fails to take into account is that the RZ system is so diverse that it can do almost anything ... except lug its big-butt self around

    The error here on this thread is connecting a piece of gear to a photographers style of shooting. They are separate.

    -Marc

  50. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Port Orchard, WA
    Posts
    157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: RZ 110/2.8 vs Canon 85/1.2 II in studio. White BG.

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    ...it can do almost anything ... except lug its big-butt self around
    Ah yup

    Now if someone actually made a 6x7 DB. I've found myself one time to many seeing the image I want and then realizing that it was not within the crop lines. But this again is a digression.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •