Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,846   Posts: 1,582,727   Online: 893
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    I really, really like my 50mm C lens too - unfortunately the shutter needs service
    Time to give Horst Wenzel a call?

    I also really like my 50mm C lens!

    Regards,
    Cory

  2. #12
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,925
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by homeiss View Post
    Time to give Horst Wenzel a call?

    I also really like my 50mm C lens!

    Regards,
    Cory
    I stopped putting it off - Horst has it on his workbench as we speak
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  3. #13
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,334
    Images
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by nwilkins
    I have an RB67 ProSD with 90mm KL and 180mm KL lenses. Both lenses are great, but I would love to get a wide angle for shots which require greater DoF.
    I have (perhaps) bad news for you: DOF depends on optical magnification, not focal length. If you use a wider lens and get up closer to the "subject" so that it's the same size in the frame, the DOF will be the same as if you'd used a longer lens from further back. The background blurs will look smaller but the truly sharp region of the frame will be the same. So if you like the dramatic in-your-face wide perspective, you're not going to fix DOF problems by going wider.

    Of course if you keep the same camera position (subject/camera distance), the DOF will be greater on the shorter lens because the magnification is lower and for a near-infinity scene (at or near hyperfocus) you obviously get more DOF from the wider lens.
    Last edited by polyglot; 09-14-2012 at 08:18 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    300
    I understand exactly how depth of field works, so there is no bad news. I was speaking of needing greater DoF in shots like the one I posted. In practical terms using hyperfocal focusing, the 50mm at F32 can focus from a little over 1.5 feet to infinity, whereas the 90mm at F32 is a little over 5 feet to infinity.

  5. #15
    porkphoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2
    Would focus stacking help you to achieve your goal?

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    376
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    28
    I have the 65mm C. The K/L version of that lens was twice as expensive on eBay, so I went ahead and bought the C instead. It's a great landscape/tripod lens, but not really suited for quick snaps because of the floating element that needs individual adjustment. Basically, it adds another step to the already long procedure: cock shutter and advance film, compose, focus, set exposure and then don't forget about adjusting the floating element. It's not a drama if you don't, but the difference is discernible.

    I shot this with the 65mm C:


    (Adox CHS 50 in Rodinal, green filter)

    Don't worry about the older lens coatings. As you can see, I shot it directly against the sun (no lens hood), and there's no flare to speak of. If you decide to get the 65mm, consider the C as a much cheaper but equally impressive alternative to the K/L.
    And the sign said, "long haired freaky people need not apply"

  7. #17
    markbarendt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Beaverton, OR, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,796
    Blog Entries
    3
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by porkphoto View Post
    Would focus stacking help you to achieve your goal?
    Morning porkphoto, welcome to APUG.

    Yes it could work, but APUG is a site dedicated to traditional non-digital photographic methods and stacking negatives for that effect is problematic.

    In the case here the OP is essentially wants to use optics to improve his or her depth of field on a single frame of film, in a single shutter drop.
    Mark Barendt, Beaverton, OR

    "We do not see things the way they are. We see things the way we are." Anaïs Nin

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    300
    yeah I don't know anything about focus stacking but if it involves digital post work I am not really interested. Thanks for the suggestion though.

    waltereegho thanks for that - that is a lovely photo too! My 90mm KL apparently has a floating element so I am familiar with the process.

  9. #19
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,925
    Images
    60
    I don't find the floating element adjustment to be all that difficult, but that may be because I generally just scale focus that setting before composing and fine focusing the rest.

    I don't think the floating element adjustment is particularly critical except when you are working at close focus or near macro distances, and generally at those distances I have lots of time to make extra careful adjustments.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  10. #20
    bushpig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Escaped Bakersfield, CA. Now in Indianapolis.
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    307
    I own the 90 C, the 180 C, and the 50 C.

    The 90 is my most used lens, followed by the 50. The 50 is a fantastic lens (but which RB lens isn't?). I went with the 50 (despite it being more expensive and me being very frugal) because I enjoy shooting inside unsafe, abandoned, decrepit buildings and wanted the widest, non-fisheye I could get. (Although I'd like to try shooting with the fish-eye someday. Just don't wanna pay as much as it usually goes for)

    I don't think you're really going to go wrong with either lens. If money's an issue, the 65 is usually cheaper.

    Good luck and happy shooting.

    Oh. And I just bought a backpack that'll hold all my RB gear (my current shoulder bag is a small bag made for a 35mm SLR. Barely holds the RB with one lens and some film.)

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin