These shots represent the 165mm f/2.8 lens, shot either wide open or stopped down to match the 135mm Macro (not shown here). I was doing comparison shots, and generally, I preferred the sharpness and details of the 165 over the 135, at least in this limited one-roll comparison.
Early morning sunlight doesn\'t seem to be the friend of Ektar 100. That\'s another thing I\'m having to adjust to: when is it the scan that I find fault with, and when is it my lack of current experience with today\'s films? Again, most images came out too saturated for me, and I dialed back the warmth of the WB a little.
Pentax 67II, Ektar 100, f/2.8-4. The rose close-up is with the Pentax #2 extension tube, which is similar subject distance to the close focusing of the 135 Macro, but a little tighter AOV.
Same PP as above.
Here\'s the similar shot of roses with the 135/4 Macro at MFD, with slight crop.
These shots represent the 165mm f/2.8 lens, shot either wide open or stopped down to match the 135mm Macro (not shown here). I was doing comparison shots, and generally, I preferred the sharpness and details of the 165 over the 135, at least in this limited one-roll comparison.
Early morning sunlight doesn\'t seem to be the friend of Ektar 100. That\'s another thing I\'m having to adjust to: when is it the scan that I find fault with, and when is it my lack of current experience with today\'s films? Again, most images came out too saturated for me, and I dialed back the warmth of the WB a little.
Pentax 67II, Ektar 100, f/2.8-4. The rose close-up is with the Pentax #2 extension tube, which is similar subject distance to the close focusing of the 135 Macro, but a little tighter AOV.
Same PP as above.
Jul 09, 2012 at 09:07 PM
Previous versions of Gunzorro's message #10791676 « Post your recent film shots! »
