Hi everyone, first I would like to say, amazing work, this thread has single-handedly opened my eyes to alt glass and how enjoyable it is to use a Zeiss lens. Now if only my compositions were as striking as the gorgeous examples in this thread.
Okay, so this may be a little off topic but I know if I ask here I'm guaranteed to get the correct answer. What filter strategy is everyone using? Do you get filters to fit the 21 and then use step-up rings for the rest of your Zeiss lenses? Or do you get individual filters? Thank you in advance.
Matt, I never use filters with my Zeiss glass. After trying various high end polarizers I came to the conclusion that the cost to image quality wasn't worth it. I have a Lee filter system with a couple of ND-grad and a couple of polarizers 82 & 72 mm (Heliopan, B+W, Scheider & Hoya) and step up rings but as I said - I'm not using them except on Canon glass on occasion.
denoir wrote:
Makten: What about the first time you used your MF camera? My typical rate with digital is between 20-40 images per hour. Often however I take multiple shots of the same subject varying the composition. It is the reason why I can keep up a regular stream of photos. The only down side is that I select the best batch first and then the quality drops off over time.
I don't know how to put this in a good way, but I actually think that your photography would improve very much if you didn't have that approach. You take a lot of good photos, with some being really good. But they sort of drown in the flow. And maybe if you slowed down a bit, the really good photos might be even better.
So,don't take this as critizism of how you do what you do. Just a little hint about quantity versus quality. None of us are at the top of our capabilities, but the ways to improvement can be the total opposite than what we think.
Concerning filters I can understand the polarizer issue, but there are some situations where you need at least a ND filter to get the picture you want.
Also, I do not use gradient filters but I saw some great pictures taken at noon with this kind of technique.
So I believe that sometime the good filter for a given situation can save the day, even if it has to cost a tiny bit of IQ.
Actually the two Zeiss lenses I buyed share the same (and small) filter size, but it was not intentional : the 2/28 and 1.4/50.
I chose them for their price/quality ratio, and for the 50mm it was also because it is extremely compact and has an unique though difficult character. I discovered later that I did not have to buy new filters for the latter one, nice surprise
Thank you very much for your explanation. I will rent the lens before buying it. I guess this is the best way for me to see whether I can master that lens or not.
Makten wrote:
I don't know how to put this in a good way, but I actually think that your photography would improve very much if you didn't have that approach. You take a lot of good photos, with some being really good. But they sort of drown in the flow. And maybe if you slowed down a bit, the really good photos might be even better.
So,don't take this as critizism of how you do what you do. Just a little hint about quantity versus quality. None of us are at the top of our capabilities, but the ways to improvement can be the total opposite than what we think. ...Show more →
I don't mind! Thanks for the suggestion I would however suggest that our approach to photography is very different - both in how it is executed and the content. I greatly admire how you find clever and unusual compositions in everyday city settings. That takes a lot of searching and patience and I can understand that you don't take many shots. My approach is different. When I go out and shoot I do so typically for 3-4 hours and pick a generally pleasant route. When I see something that I think would be interesting I stop and begin exploring it through a series of shots where I experiment with composition, aperture, light etc
I can give you an example:
What attracted me initially was the soft light and I wanted to use the 85's thin DOF to create some volume in the shot. Although #4 is best in terms of composition #2 is actually the best picture of the lot as the DOF is just right. And I've learned something from each of them. I have a digital camera so experimenting costs nothing and I often learn something new or get a new idea.
In fact, I would recommend it to you as well - when you find something you like, don't take just one shot - take ten! Experiment. If you are already confident about the result of regular changes in composition, bokeh etc then go wilder with the composition. Hold the camera upside down if you have to! It's true that most shots won't be as good as one planned in detail but you'll find that quite often you can get surprising results - in a good way.
As for the images posted here, you are of course correct that the best pictures get lost in the sheer mass of images when you post in such a quantity as I do. I have a reason for that though. I see this thread as educational - in two directions. First other people here see and can get some insights from my experiments and I get interesting feedback. In fact there is a very wide discrepancy between what I consider to be my best images and what other people consider. That's always interesting.
I also don't see this as a place to show my best images. In my own web gallery I post perhaps one in fifty or fewer of the images I post here. You get an even more extreme ratio if you consider that of the thousands of images I've shot this year, I've had a total of five exhibited - and one was actually shot with a Canon lens. In the end my philosophy is that it's better to have too many images to choose from than too few. I'm of course not endorsing a 'spray and pray' approach - each shot should have some meaning and a thought behind it but simply that it doesn't hurt to experiment.
Anyway, that's my result-oriented two cents. In reality if you are doing it as a hobby your own enjoyment should come first. No point really in taking great pictures if you are not enjoying the process
So, to fulfill my obsessive compulsive image posting needs , here is a variation that I've discarded (the portrait version was a bit better when you saw the full reflection of the house):
Thank you Mortyb, Ryan Yes the M9 is a pretty cool landscape camera
Excellent shots Luka! Great stuff with the information. I have learned so much from these threads!.
Hugo, yes, I couldn't quite decide myself which one I liked better. In fact I shouldn't have been so lazy and should have mounted the 85/1.4 for the shot to capture both the boat and to get a complete reflection. The problem was that it was so dark that I could not actually see the house and much less the reflection - something that complicated getting a composition.
