Almost looks like an indoor shot. Great work getting all three in the focus plane.
---------------------------------------------
AdaptedLenses wrote:
Ray, you’ve been killing it recently, keep up the great work. Curtis, welcome back! Leighton, I can’t bring myself to like your spider. I hate those things.
Thanks Matt! Work has afforded a little bit of the luxury of time lately coinciding with decent light.
---------------------------------------------
James Markus wrote:
Meanwhile the most beaten up 1920s (I'm guessing 1929 or 1930) Voightlander 6x9 Bessa turned up with a lovely hand written note hoping I would love it as much as they had. It was so cheap that I had planned to redo the leatherette in 1960's navy blue woven nylon Oldsmobile seat cover cloth from a bolt I have been carting around since a neighbor gave it to me as a kid. However, everything works great on the camera, and the missing leathers, glue and rust are growing on me. All 55mm f3.5 ai micro
Voightlander Voigtar 10.5cm f4.5 Lens - missing it's name ring
You don't have an obsessive personality do you Jim?
---------------------------------------------
Ballard wrote:
All in Columbia Gorge. The first 2 are Coyote Wall.
These were a test of the 135/3.5 Q that Curtis sent me. Camera was Z6. I was curious if image quality of the old lens would hold up. It’s definitely sharp. The contrast is a bit lower than modern multicoated optics, but easily corrected in post.
According to the serial number list on the photosynthesis website, http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html, the lens should be about 52 years old. So I guess both lens and photographer are certifiably old codgers. I turned 75 two weeks ago today, and I think the lens is doing better than I am. I know it will certainly outlast me.
That is quite a sloped wall, the tipped vertical faces are throwing me off.
---------------------------------------------
James Markus wrote:
I souped a roll of Technical Pan 25 last night that I found while cleaning the darkroom awhile back, and it turned out to be from 1998. That would make it the Nikon F3HP with the 35-105mm ais lens. I purchased expired Kodak chemistry off ebay - none of which looked bad. I was surprised at the highlight density (super dense), but I think I was using a Sunpak flash. Either that or I over developed, the film crystals grew in the cassette over the last 26 years, or it reacted with the C-41 120mm roll I had in the tank with 35mm reel. (I thought it was a 120 roll of tech pan) These are 6 of my 7 kids (last wasn't born yet) in the family portrait tree on the edge of Kehl lake.
Love it!
---------------------------------------------
SiMuMe wrote: pbraymond wrote:
I posted something this weekend for spider fans:
Still want to know the secret to getting close to spiders/web. Notice most of my spider webs have no spiders. If there is one, it's a tiny thing.
Move slowly and deliberately, use a longer lens (this one was 120mm full frame equivalent FL), and utilize post processing crop. In my 45 minute walk the morning of this shot, this was the only web with the owner.
---------------------------------------------
leighton w wrote: pbraymond wrote:
200mm f4.0 AI.
Two things I like the most about this image.
First, how the light is just touching the top of the trees. And secondly, the composition, the two separate clumps of trees acting as bookends, and for a bonus, the deer. Well seen.
Thanks Leighton. This shot was just to the right of the following pano.
