So you think the ZI has the best focus on fast lenses due to the base length? For cost purposes, though, would the R3A with a fast 35 and 50 be okay for say 1.2 or 1.4?
corposant wrote:
No - if I were going to buy another RF to complement my ZI, I'd get an R4A, so I could have a .52 VF magnification for WA lenses. The ZI is kind of a best in breed if you ask me - the longest RF base length and the best VF in the biz. That said, I don't think Bessas are bad cameras - they are produced by Cosina.
You should be fine with the R3A with lenses that speed. You'd probably have troubles with a 75/1.4 or 50/1. The ZI will be better at focusing super fast lenses (and is a nicer camera in other ways).
Personally, I find that on a (film) Leica M with 0.72 magnification, I can focus my 75/1.4 reasonably well at f/1.4. The 50/1 and 90/2 are about as hard to focus. The ZI would focus these lenses a bit easier, about the same as a Leica with 0.85 mag. The M3 will focus easier than the ZI. Cameras with smaller effective base lengths (Leica 0.58, R3A, etc.) would probably have some problems with the 3 lenses mentioned above, but shouldn't have too much difficulty with a 50/1.4. Lastly, with my 75/1.4, I find that a factor that has a bigger impact than focusing accuracy is my inability to stay still after focusing and before shooting - at minimum focus distance at f/1.4, if I or my subject sway by even a bit of a centimeter, the point I focused on is no longer in focus.
corposant wrote:
Thanks - rated at 1600 and developed at 1600.
Thanks for the info! And the photos look great, so I guess I should consider pushing color negative film if required despite that being not recommended.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Thanks for the info! And the photos look great, so I guess I should consider pushing color negative film if required despite that being not recommended.
Portra 400 has something like 14 stops of dynamic range, so technically you can push/pull 3 stops - I know alkenphel has done some work at 3200, I think the color/contrast/grain is pretty awesome at 1600.
corposant wrote:
Portra 400 has something like 14 stops of dynamic range, so technically you can push/pull 3 stops - I know alkenphel has done some work at 3200, I think the color/contrast/grain is pretty awesome at 1600.
corposant I went through some of the Nex thread and without seeing your name still knew a few of the shots were yours. Must be all those beach photos. Defineable quality even without the film.
Some more film comparisons. Check out Portra compared to Velvia O_O! Obviously not much color adjustment but even with a black and white point set it is still so damn flat! The color difference is crazy. http://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2011/06/colour-film-comparison-pt-3/
Yup I posted a bunch of photos earlier which were all Portra 400, rated at 3200 then developed normally and later pushed in Lightroom 3. I moved the Exposure slider to +2.5 or 3. I do have a couple of photos rated at 6400 and above but they look horrible. I think using 3200 is something of a last resort and I'll probably try to keep it to 1600 and below.
Zaitz wrote:
corposant I went through some of the Nex thread and without seeing your name still knew a few of the shots were yours. Must be all those beach photos. Defineable quality even without the film.
Thanks - I feel kind of badly for really only contributing enticing beach photos to that thread, but I really have not figured out how to balance the NEX with my film gear. I have only really taken it with me on short jaunts, especially since I am trying to shoot through the rest of my 35mm film (80 rolls to go) before I make a decision on what direction I want to go with the format (buy more film vs. NEX only vs. digital M vs. Fuji vs. some combination).
edwardkaraa wrote:
Zaitz and Alkanphel, thank you for the amazing links and the push info.
+1 - you could go nuts looking at all the film comparisons.
I remember Nate chiding me several pages back on mixing and matching film varieties while shooting. While I understand the nature of his argument, I still really enjoy shooting all types of film, though like everybody, I have my favorites.
corposant wrote:
especially since I am trying to shoot through the rest of my 35mm film (80 rolls to go) before I make a decision on what direction I want to go with the format (buy more film vs. NEX only vs. digital M vs. Fuji vs. some combination).
Hehe, better never to touch the shutter under any circumstances
Leica M6 manual recommends to change the lenses in subdued light. However, I have done it occasionally undear mean noon sunlight and no leaks whatsoever.
Must be all those beach photos. Defineable quality even without the film.
