Thought this could be interesting. Nikon ZF. First test with pixel-shift, on my lunch-break. Nothing artistic, only wanted to try the feature. Since the weather is lousy I went into a church. First reflection is that the ZFs cpu is realy fast, secondly pixel-shift eats batteries quick. I made no adjustment in merging or exporting, first there are three 100% crops then the orifinal photo resized. Voigtländer Nokton 58mm SLIIs on FTZ.
OwlsEyes wrote:
This is beautiful work Luca... I love locations like this, as there is an endless opportunity to capture the beauty in nature.
bruce
Bruce,
Thank you so much for your kind comments. White Mountain has real special beauty. Although Mount Washington draws huge tourist crowd going up the mountain in Cog rail, shuttle bus, driving up the mountain, and huge ATV crowd rambling around, the power of nature is so overwhelmingly strong and it does not diminish its beauty. Fall season is especially magical when the entire range turns color, it feels there is some mystical power to the place. With ample options of various hiking trails, one can always find beauty. Challenge is that most trails are long and quite strenuous. I am certain there are many more beautiful spots to photograph, but they require overnight packing to get to the locations, especially for photo centric purposes, I would not want to just blaze through with no meaningful time to find the beauty, think about how to capture, you know, the fun stuff. So, there are so much more I have not got to. I would love to try one day, but I am a bit of a wimp when it comes to backpacking with photo gear and long technically challenging hike all day in a cold mountain climate. I feel like I need to train myself before even thinking about doing it.
For now, I am going to areas with easy access, but getting there early in the morning for the good light and to avoid crowd.
Jman13 wrote:
Went to shoot one of my favorite waterfalls, but it was dry even though we've had rain for two days. Still got some nice shots of the fall colors.
Z8 with 14-24mm f/2.8 S, 24-120mm f/4 S, 70-180mm f/2.8:
DeltaSigma wrote:
Is it just me or do other people think those 40/1.2 images stand out from the rest?
Nice work Luka.
Colin
Colin,
Thank you. I love the rendering of 40/1.2 especially when aperture is not closed down too much. Up to ( or down to ? ) f3.2-f4 or so, the rendering is quite pleasing. I really like it. Now, the same scene at f7.2 or f8. Definitely more DOF and overall, sharper. however, it feels, a little bit flat, or dull. I often am drawn to the brighter exposure shot of the same scene even though it is a bit less sharp, and more areas are out of focus. There is some subtle change in rendering that sometimes feels quite obvious, but by examining images I can't pin point what it is that is more attrractive about the brighter, bigger aperture ]shots. Micro contrast reduces ? No idea. Closest experience would be during PP process, when images are over sharpened just a little bit too much, I often get negative reaction to the images. It is similar to that feeling. Pretty subjective, and can't explain well at the moment. Regardless to say, I am enjoying this lens a lot, and more constantly when I do not close it down too much. I am hoping to understand what is giving me those impression so that I can control the outcome..
Other thing I wonder, is that even though they are very good lenses, Z f4 zooms ( 14-30, 24-70 ) may be also a bit flat in comparison to 40/1.2. or, Nikon's bigger f2.8 brothers ( 14-24, 24-70 ). And it is not the sharpness. They are plenty sharp. It is like the richness in the rendering. Well, totally subjective impression. ( I don't want this impression to be the can of worms to seek 2.8 zooms. They are too heavy, bigger, and cost more...)
Nice shots, generally agree on the 40 though it’s been a while since I shot it (might need to fix that). Always liked the depth it’d draw a landscape with.
Z6II shot with an old Nikon 50-135. Like this paired with a 28-50. More fun than modern glass.
akul wrote:
Colin,
Thank you. I love the rendering of 40/1.2 especially when aperture is not closed down too much. Up to ( or down to ? ) f3.2-f4 or so, the rendering is quite pleasing. I really like it. Now, the same scene at f7.2 or f8. Definitely more DOF and overall, sharper. however, it feels, a little bit flat, or dull. I often am drawn to the brighter exposure shot of the same scene even though it is a bit less sharp, and more areas are out of focus. There is some subtle change in rendering that sometimes feels quite obvious, but by examining images I can't pin point what it is that is more attrractive about the brighter, bigger aperture ]shots. Micro contrast reduces ? No idea. Closest experience would be during PP process, when images are over sharpened just a little bit too much, I often get negative reaction to the images. It is similar to that feeling. Pretty subjective, and can't explain well at the moment. Regardless to say, I am enjoying this lens a lot, and more constantly when I do not close it down too much. I am hoping to understand what is giving me those impression so that I can control the outcome..
Other thing I wonder, is that even though they are very good lenses, Z f4 zooms ( 14-30, 24-70 ) may be also a bit flat in comparison to 40/1.2. or, Nikon's bigger f2.8 brothers ( 14-24, 24-70 ). And it is not the sharpness. They are plenty sharp. It is like the richness in the rendering. Well, totally subjective impression. ( I don't want this impression to be the can of worms to seek 2.8 zooms. They are too heavy, bigger, and cost more...)
. 
