Diploneis wrote:
Haaha... Right! That already depends on you - you come up with kitsch or with something creative and different
I have yet to see a model picture at a ruin that isn't tacky. Since models never go to ruins without the photographer telling them to do so, all those model-at-ruin shots will automatically be arranged. And I don't fancy arranged photography.
desinteresadam wrote:
...though you could check this link: (image removed by Samuli)
and see how good it works in challenging conditions( shooting against the sun at sunset, or sunrise without nd grads)
thank you for your detailed response Samuli and forgive my english please
desinteresadam, your English is OK. This kind of unnatural effects (the rocks on left should not be that bright compared to the rest of the image, unless this is some weird 160+ degree wide panorama) is what I don't like when shooting with grads or doing HDR in a way resulting unnatural balance of dark and bright spots on image.
------------
Makten, 2nd of the film B&W images is marvellous!
-----------
Luka, the 4rd image (tractor) would be perfect from composition and focus point of view if you would have "5 seconds before" version... Also liked the guy with long shadow. Typically I could not care less about animal photos but rendering style on the rabbit photo is marvellous.
-----------
In Finland we had special conditions; there are big forest fires in Russia and we had worst air quality day of this summer due to this - also it happened to be hottest day of this summer. Of course I look this kind of "event" from different point of view; how I can utilize these special conditions for photography... Typically air is so clear that it's really hard to do any kind of layered landscapes etc.
Orivesi 01 - Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 @ f/9, HDR, ISO 100
Orivesi 02 - Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/50 @ f/9, HDR, ISO 100
Orivesi 03 "C.S.I. Miami-look" (no special PP) - Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/50 @ f/10, HDR, ISO 100
And hopefully rain inside these clouds will "wash" the air back to normal
Orivesi 04 - Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/21 @ f/5.6, HDR, ISO 100
Thanks Samuli. You are quite right about the tractor - it was taken while in a moving car - hence the missed focus and composition. I liked the colors in the shot though.
Great shots. Orivesi 03 is amazing! Perfect detailed foreground, nice rolling hills, great sky and composition. Again your HDR work is really good. I like Orivesi 04 as well but I think it would have been even better if that hill had not been dead center but more to the right. Very nice sky though and I like the different color layers of the grass.
Speaking of composition, here are a few more shots that were all shot from a moving car:
I had to jack up the contrast to max on the first and third picture and they are pretty much unusable for anything larger than what you see here. Unfortunately shooting through a semi-dirty car window effectively destroys the Zeiss rendering quality. The last image is a heavy crop (through an open car window though).
Samuli, I really like the third image. About 12 yes ago my city had horrible forest fires. During the day the sky was ugly/washed out as your first pic shows. However, after sunset and sunrise the sky will have a fantastic glow around the area that is burning. I suggest, make lemonade
When you see the photo on zeissimages.com, click on the link that says bb code. You can paste that link directly into a thread here and the images will show.
What Philippe says!
Orivesi 03 is a great HDR shot with a great landscape lens, the 50MP!
I just broke down and ordered a ZE 21 to round out my Zeiss lens collection.
Can't wait to use it in the fall!
denoir wrote:
Nice Makten. It's interesting to see how even on film and B/W you can see the Zeiss rendering style.
ulrikft2 wrote:
Love those film images.. great tonality!
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Makten, 2nd of the film B&W images is marvellous!
charles.K wrote:
Nice film shots Makten. Really like the ZM 35/2.8 rendering. I think this may a better lens than the ZM 35/2.
Thanks all! The lens is the most perfect compromise I can imagine. Small, light, sharp, lovely bokeh (except for the corners @ f/2.8), "3D", no distortion, and so on. I'd say it is very much like the ZF/ZE 50/1.4 stopped down to f/2.8, and therefore not at all like the 35/2 Distagon.
I don't know if it's better than the Biogon 35/2, but it's quite a bit smaller and from tests I've seen, the bokeh is a tad smoother. But you lose that nice-to-have extra stop. What the hey, I'll only use the M6 for daytime walkarounds anyway.
------------------------
Some more C-Biogon 35/2.8 ZM with Kodak Tmax 100, home developed in D-76 1:1 and scanned with Epson V700...
I could have sharpened these a lot more, but I think it looks nicer not to do so with film. It wouldn't look like film anymore.
teh_rebel wrote:
sharpness looks good as it is. great feel to those film shots. nice!
What I meant was that they could be PP:d to the same sharpness as my D700-with-Zeiss shots, but it would sort of ruin the "feel".
rsolti13 wrote:
Great shots Makten. I like all three very much. Maybe I need a film and digital M8.....hmm
Thanks! This is my second roll of film ever, sort of (I shot film when I was about 12 years old, but knew nothing about photography). I must admit that I'm very proud and happy with managing to make it look so good when I've done all the work myself. That makes it much more fun to shoot film. I really enjoyed the M8 I had before, but this is different. Very different.
While M8/M9 are great for accurate colors and so on, there's no chance of getting the same B/W look as with film. There aren't enough bits. If you apply a curve (inverted Gamma plus strong S) to a RAW file from a digital camera to get the same tonality, you'll get strong posterisation and a noise from hell.
So, I see film as a more artistic way of photographing. With the D700 and ZF lenses, I tend to PP for something that looks "real". While the film is what it is, in its beaty.
Thanks all! The lens is the most perfect compromise I can imagine. Small, light, sharp, lovely bokeh (except for the corners @ f/2.8), "3D", no distortion, and so on. I'd say it is very much like the ZF/ZE 50/1.4 stopped down to f/2.8, and therefore not at all like the 35/2 Distagon.
I don't know if it's better than the Biogon 35/2, but it's quite a bit smaller and from tests I've seen, the bokeh is a tad smoother. But you lose that nice-to-have extra stop. What the hey, I'll only use the M6 for daytime walkarounds anyway.
------------------------
Some more C-Biogon 35/2.8 ZM with Kodak Tmax 100, home developed in D-76 1:1 and scanned with Epson V700...
Since models never go to ruins without the photographer telling them to do so, all those model-at-ruin shots will automatically be arranged. And I don't fancy arranged photography. 
