Samuli Vahonen wrote:
In addition to exclusion tele lens in landscape makes it possible to shoot "layered landscape" like you had done on your 2nd last shot, which I liked and would not call it failure.
I think the characteristics of 100Z* in landscapes is brilliance (ref. Lloyd - where this is explained pretty well). When supported by usage of polarizer the images may be extremely vivid, sometimes one needs to desaturate images...
Beautiful last shot (Mustalamminvuori). As for mine, well, failure is perhaps a bit of an overstatement but you can safely say that the landscape shots I got with the 100MP fell below my expectations.
I'm much more comfortable with 100mm close up or at moderate distances...
(A fellow mountaineer at the Risnjak summit)
'
Charles, thanks for the information about the monitor. I've bee thinking of replacing my twin HP W2408H's with something more suitable for working with photos. The NEC PA241W certainly seems like a viable candidate. I have not decided yet though if I should go for wide gamut or sRGB accuracy. I'm also not sure if I should stick to 24" (1920x1200) or go up to 27". The argument against it is that two 24" take up too much space on my desk as it is.
@denoir: I like the 2nd shot, but the red is oversaturated on my wide gamut screen (not calibrated yet).
This is off-topic, but I recently bought a Dell U2410, which is also wide-gamut at 102% NTSC colour gamut, which is the same as the NEC PA241W. The NEC should be at a higher standard and I'd like to have one with the calibrator, but it's about twice as expensive as the Dell or HP LP2475W. I guess one of the big differences is the programmable LUT and the Spectraview software. I see it works with many different calibration devices: http://www.necdisplay.com/supportcenter/monitors/spectraview2/compatibility/
I was used to an Apple Cinema 30" at 2560x1600 and I must say the finer pixel pitch really is heaven. I'm happy with my Dell but the pixels just are pretty big... Go for finer pixel pitch and more working space if your budget allows! Two 24" screens are not a replacement for that.
AhamB wrote:
I was used to an Apple Cinema 30" at 2560x1600 and I must say the finer pixel pitch really is heaven. I'm happy with my Dell but the pixels just are pretty big... Go for finer pixel pitch and more working space if your budget allows! Two 24" screens are not a replacement for that.
I've used dual monitors now for years, and I'd never give it up. Screen real estate is essential and I like the separation. It's excellent for reviewing photos - you have the full image on one screen and 100% zoom at the other. That way you can quickly tell both if the image is any good as a whole and whether you've nailed focus.
2x30" would take up way too much space though. I think that 2x24 or 2x27 is the realistic upper limit.
Right now however, I'm still on vacation abroad and I'm suffering a 1280x800 Macbook Air screen. The dot pitch is enormous - very large pixels. It's awful and so is having just one USB port. This is what my reality looks like today when I hook up two external disks and a card reader via an external USB hub:
Thanks a lot Steve Jobs, really elegant solution. Shot with the 21 Distagon by the way.
edwardkaraa wrote:
OK, this is not a nice landscape or an artistic shot, just my first photo ( excluding many test shots ) with the ZS 35/2. I'm very happy with the high micro-contrast and 3D rendition of this lens, but I guess this is old news for you guys.
Joakim: Nice shot. I really like that kind of bokeh - I would have even preferred it to be stronger.
Phlippe: Quite so. I see you've reached f/2.8 - just one stop to go
edwardkaraa wrote:
OK, this is not a nice landscape or an artistic shot, just my first photo ( excluding many test shots ) with the ZS 35/2. I'm very happy with the high micro-contrast and 3D rendition of this lens, but I guess this is old news for you guys.
Edward, 2/35 seems really good for small group photos, looks so alive (compared to my archives of similar photos shot with Canon glass when I still did weddings - also Canon would have rendered the black shorts to black holes without no detail).
denoir wrote:
I'm much more comfortable with 100mm close up or at moderate distances...
joakim wrote:
Same kind of flower as Luka shot but with a more painted, impressionist like background. ZE 28/2.0 of course :-)
In addition to impressionistic bokeh a little swirly bokeh can be achieved with suitable texture and distance, have to be careful thou for bigger DOF in corners.
philber wrote:
The 100mm close up. You mean like this, Luka?
Nice colors and separation - f/2.8 are you changing style?
I got a bit better results from the top of Risnjak, but still nothing spectacular - nothing that would take advantage of that particular lens. It really annoys me when I can't make good use of the characteristic features of a specific lens - and so far I only know how to use the 100 MP for closeups. I've tried to do some combinations and experiment with foreground objects but the results so far have been mediocre at best:
If I might offer a comment. I think the problem is that for landscapes with
a 100mm focal length, as opposed to a wide angle focal length, you might
do better to not include a foreground element. Or if you do include it,
the focus should not be on the foreground object, but rather at infinity.
I was comparing some of the successful 100mm landscape shots with
the ones you said you weren't happy with and that seemed like one
difference. Your shots all had a close up object and it was often where
the focus was.
I have essentially a reverse problem. I am used to and happier shooting
with a longer lens. You pick something central to be the focus. The
foreground is often out of focus. Whereas for wide angles, you have such
a depth of focus you can often include a foreground object and everything
from it to infinity is in focus.
Thank you for the feedback/suggestions. The problem that particular day was that it was hazy so the visibility dropped off pretty fast. So to take advantage of the 100MP's resolution I had to pick something that wasn't affected by the haze - and that was typically a rock close by. The idea was to get something ultra sharp in the foreground, preferably with a 3D appearance and then to let the rest serve as a backdrop. That was the theory anyway, but I wasn't happy with the results. You are probably correct that in general wide angle shots benefit much more from foreground objects.
mortyb, nice shots. Great to see the Z*35 on a different camera.
Great shots with 21 Luka! I like these shots, as it is not the standard style shot, where everything is parallel, so any distortion will stand out more. I noticed with Snowboarder's shots, he does not try and keep front on, but adds to the perspective with different angles.
Luka, NEC has both the 24" PA 241W and 27" PA 271W, with multiple calibrations available on the monitor, which you can change within seconds. The calibrations with the Spectra II software is a hardware calibration and is very accurate. I am noticing colours and issues, which I could not have seen before even with this new 24" monitor. The Eizo monitors are excellent, but you do not have the provisions for multiple calibration profiles, and are a lot more expensive.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Edward, 2/35 seems really good for small group photos, looks so alive (compared to my archives of similar photos shot with Canon glass when I still did weddings - also Canon would have rendered the black shorts to black holes without no detail).
Samuli
Hi Samuli,
Yes, I'm pleasantly surprised with this lens. The drawing style is so appealing.
Mortyb, nice to see more Sony images with familiar lens. Colors are somehow different than in Canon (I shoot a lot in similar forests).
Denoir, seems that Zagreb cathedral has quite much light (compared to Notre Dame for example). My favourite is for some reason the #3 (shallow DOF 21mm shot).
Few photos from Ireland, in which I tried to shoot the roads tunneled by trees, one of the targets I wanted to shoot in Ireland.
Ireland - Co. Clare 01 - Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2/35 @ f/8, 1/80s, ISO 100:
Ireland - Co. Clare 02 - Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2/28 @ f/8, 1/100s, ISO 100:
Ireland - Co. Clare 03 - Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100 @ f/2.8, 1/50s, ISO 100:
Ireland - Co. Clare 04 - Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/21 @ f/11, 0.6s, ISO 100:
Ireland - Co. Clare 05 - Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 @ f/11, 0.6s, ISO 100:
Shot with the 21 Distagon by the way.
