I know what you mean - I have three rolls of 120 film (6x7) in my refrigerator ready to be developed and I have no idea if even if a single exposure was made correctly.
jhapeman wrote:
Luka, I like the two night shots, but seriously, if you're going to use a tripod, you might as well go all the way and start shooting large format. 8x10. Time to man up to a real camera. :-)
+1 That's what I was thinking a couple of nights ago. It's going to be a long time if ever before there's a digital camera that can produce that kind of resolution.
ulrikft2 wrote:
The problem is development, size, weight, time.. and similar issues
Indeed. I am sitting here going through the pain of scanning slides...and it also reminds me of how much digital has spoiled us: Old ISO 800 film looks nastier than ISO 12,8000 on a modern Canon or Leica.
Joe, great shot!
Thanks Luka Yes it is not the Zeiss look I was hoping for, but still excellent in its own right. Great shots with the X1
Having come from film, I would find hard to go back. I would definitely give it a go, but the uncertainty in film processing, always had put me off in the past.
I am just get ready of another trip to Thailand for about 2 weeks. Business and pleasure, so I will try to post when I can.
I think that using a simple variant of the zone system helps take the uncertainty out of film. One gets used to this aspect. I think the key to high-quality film photography is a good 1 degree spot meter, and the know-how to use it.
Not being able to check the results until the film has been developed feels scary, but it does something which no digital camera can do to the same extent: it removes any distraction from the task at hand, namely taking pictures. There is still the setup, but once you are good with a meter, that becomes part of the creative process. Chimping is not a part of the creative process, it is quality assurance. Removing that keeps me in the groove much longer.
So true Carsten! I did use a spot meter, but I found that the development of film would vary considerably, with the age of the chemicals. Also I despised spending so much time in the dark room sniffing all the chemicals. Digital PP, did gave me a whole new interest in photography again But this is me.
I would however try MF film again, as I find this fascinating and very interesting!!!
So it's going to be an M9 only trip (i.e no DSLR)?
Carsten, what I have been doing is either using my 5DII or X1 for metering. The really good thing about the 5DII metering comes from the use of live view. I just select a region in the frame and it calculates the exposure so that the region is well exposed. It's a sort of center-weighted metering except where the center is can be selected. The X1 isn't as sophisticated but live view is still useful.
There are a couple of problems though. First ISO isn't quite the same for all cameras. ISO 100 on the 5DII is actually something like ISO 125. Another problem is that the X1 has no ISO 160. Finally the aperture control and shutter dial on the Pentax 67 are all in full stops. So basically I dial in the closest setting before taking the picture. I think in the worst case I could be off by half a stop but that shouldn't be too bad.
As for chimping, it's what keeps me going. I get a kick out of seeing a shot I like on the LCD and get really a feeling of a "job well done" when it's technically perfect. It definitely inspires me to go and shoot more. It's one of the things that kills a bit of the fun with the X1. You look at the display and the image you see always looks like crap. I've actually stopped looking on the X1 (also image review is painfully slow and not good for checking the quality of the shot). As a result I always end up with a number of shots that could have been really good but are not because I could not check the quality properly.
Charles, I only develop my B&W film myself. Then I scan. I used to love spending time in the darkroom, but I think it is safe to say that my life isn't conducive to something so extravagantly time- and space-hogging these days.
Luka, like I said, chimping is quality assurance If that is where you get your motivation to keep going, we are very different. After a good day out, I almost feel like I don't care if all my photos are crap. I just love walking around, seeing in that special way, framing, measuring, composing, creating. That is where 90% of my enjoyment comes from, which is why I prefer the D3 to the 5D2 (among other reasons). It is just rock-solid and you can rely on it with a very high percentage. The 5D2 is more moody, and you need to pay attention to a number of factors. That annoys me and make me lose my flow.
So, are you going to chip in with an opinion in my useless 100mm comparo thread? I would be interested to see what you think about the three lenses.
Yes, this will be a M9 trip only! I will take the ZM 25, 35 Summicron, 50 Lux Asph, ZM 50 Planar and the 90 Summicron AA. I feel liberated now knowing I don't have to carry the 5DII/lenses and gear. I still need a laptop for business, so now having the Macbook Pro 17, running W7 64 bit with CS5, will be great to download photos and to store them safely on the run.
Carsten, I have the utmost respect for film, and the skills associated with this art
Carsten, to me seeing the picture is the main inspiration. One of the reasons why I'm not using my Canon glass is because I get disappointed at the chimping stage. Although I know perfectly well that it generally just needs a bit of adjustments in PP my initial disappointment kills off my enthusiasm for continuing shooting. On the other hand seeing an image that I like inspires me.
So, are you going to chip in with an opinion in my useless 100mm comparo thread?
charles.K wrote:
Yes, this will be a M9 trip only! I will take the ZM 25, 35 Summicron, 50 Lux Asph, ZM 50 Planar and the 90 Summicron AA. I feel liberated now knowing I don't have to carry the 5DII/lenses and gear. I still need a laptop for business, so now having the Macbook Pro 17, running W7 64 bit with CS5, will be great to download photos and to store them safely on the run.
Well, good luck and I hope you have a nice trip! I'm sure you've had enough training now with the M9 to make it work. Looking forward to your shots.
Laptops for photos are always a complication. As I use a proper workstation both at home and at work I basically only use my laptop for powerpoint presentations and when I travel. So my priority is that it's portable and hence I use a Macbook Air for the purpose (running W7 32 bit). The problem is that it's pathetically weak. Opening a RAW image in Lightroom at full resolution takes almost a minutes. So I can't do proper RAW development and the images have to wait until I get home. Another complicating factor is that it has one usb port (thank you Steve Jobs) and since I want to do backups to two disks, I have to use a powered USB hub etc etc It ain't pretty:
I'm thinking about perhaps getting a dedicated device where I would just plug in the memory card but they tend to be overly complicated or have to little space and I'd need two of them.. sigh.. nothing's easy.
Please do. It is incredibly effective in removing prejudices. I can feel my beliefs shifting slightly in the last few days...
Btw, if I send you three full-res TIFF files, corresponding to the three lenses, would you try to tickle 3D out of them all, and post a 1000pixel image for each in the thread (perhaps either the chess board, or the water tap)?
denoir wrote:
I'm thinking about perhaps getting a dedicated device where I would just plug in the memory card but they tend to be overly complicated or have to little space and I'd need two of them.. sigh.. nothing's easy.
What about just getting more memory cards? They are getting so cheap now.
Luka, my last trip to Thailand I used a HP W7 64 bit laptop, but I had a lot of problems with the monitor, even with it calibrated just did not work very well. I now use an external 1TB HD, for downloading which is very quick, and I use ACR for quick edits. Of course, I wait until I get back to PP everything properly. This time with the Macbook Pro 17", I7 running w7 64 bit with cs5 64, should be a lot better. I will update when I can.
carstenw wrote:
Please do. It is incredibly effective in removing prejudices. I can feel my beliefs shifting slightly in the last few days...
Btw, if I send you three full-res TIFF files, corresponding to the three lenses, would you try to tickle 3D out of them all, and post a 1000pixel image for each in the thread (perhaps either the chess board, or the water tap)?
Sure, that could be fun. Both the chessboard and the tap should do well. Give me the images and I'll see what I can do.
The reason why I do not want to state my opinion in that thread is because I'm biased. I happen to know the effective focal length (it ain't 100mm) of a couple of so called "100mm" lenses and can sort them out on that basis alone. That introduces a bias - even if I'm wrong. You can of course tell them apart on rendering as well but the shortcut of doing it through the FL ruins that option for me.
carstenw wrote:
What about just getting more memory cards? They are getting so cheap now.
I have 4x32 GB + 2X64 GB and it's enough not to have to format a card on a longer vacation. Remember I'm shooting a 21 megapixel camera, not a 12 megapixel toy
It is not enough though. I need redundancies - i.e always a backup set.
I am not sure why you need a backup, to be honest. If the write worked, you have it. If it didn't, you don't have it, even before you make your copies. Unless you carry one set and leave the other in the hotel, for avoiding theft?
The D3 (and I guess the pro Canons too) can take two cards, and write simultaneously. A great feature for the nervous.
I will bundle up both tap and chess sets and send you a download link. Do you want me to do any processing before converting to TIFF? 16-bit or 32-bit? I guess no extra processing (you can do that with the full data available), and 16-bit. 32-bit is a silly thought I had because I work with such files.
If you think you know which lenses are which, please PM/email me with the reasons. I am very interested to hear what the more observant people around here see that I might not see. I am too tolerant Samuli's input would also be interesting, and maybe Richard's (brainiac), if he is still listening in.
denoir wrote:
The really good thing about the 5DII metering comes from the use of live view. I just select a region in the frame and it calculates the exposure so that the region is well exposed. It's a sort of center-weighted metering except where the center is can be selected.
Ah, the Leica M9 has that too. It is called "pointing the camera"
Because disks and memory cards fail. You can drop them, format by accident or a million other things. Daily backups is elementary for me. Quite a few pictures fit on a 64 GB card and something as trivial as dropping the camera could put them at risk. You can alway buy new equipment but lost images are permanently lost.
Not enough. It only covers the failure of one memory card not of something like dropping the camera.
I looked at the pictures and I'm not sure what to do with them, so I don't know if there is any point. My resize & sharpen script is for 21 megapixel images. It works rather poorly on the 16 megapixel Leica X1 images and I don't want to think what it will look like applied on a 12 megapixel shot. I don't have the time to write and test new scripts optimized for the lower resolution. I can run my scripts on the images, or try a quick manual job but I'm not sure what the point would be.
Although I understand and appreciate what you are trying to do, I thoroughly disapprove of such tests. You have to control for exactly all the variables, use a tripod + live view focusing, mirror lockup, manual white balance, exactly the same focus point etc etc And even with such controls the only point of such a test is to highlight a difference in a specific situation. Different lenses are good at different things and you need to get to know them through hundreds if not thousands of photos. Do you really think that looking at a couple of web sized photos is a basis to decide which lens one prefers?
Anyway, if you still want me to try to sharpen and resize the images, 16 bit developed with standard settings will do just fine.
carstenw wrote:
Ah, the Leica M9 has that too. It is called "pointing the camera"
How large do you print, btw?
Yeah, and you can see the exposure on the M9 so that you can do the necessary EC to get the whole picture well exposed, right?
I usually don't print larger than A3 but I very frequently crop. When printing using a lightjet or a very high quality inkjet I've found that around 18 megapixels is the lower resolution limit that I tolerate. I can see a resolution difference between my 7D shots and 5DII shots on an A3 page if I look closely and even more so when looking at the X1 shots. I do mostly A3-sized photo books and I want to be able to look closely at a photo and to be able to discover detail you would not see from further away.
