Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,564   Posts: 1,573,377   Online: 961
      
Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 128
  1. #41
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,325
    Images
    12
    A 110/2.8 on 6x7 is approximately the same (in FOV and DOF) as a 55/1.4 on 35mm. There's no easy comparison because the aspect ratio differs: when you frame, do you compare the long side, short side or diagonal?

    A simpler way is to look at the physical aperture size - that will give you a good idea of how much bokeh there is for similar fields of view. 110/2.8 = 55/1.4 = 39.3mm, and 50/1.4 = 35.7mm.

    So many more 35mm systems were made though that good glass for them is easier to find. But if you want large, creamy smooth prints, you need large negatives too.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    37
    There´s some good points in this thread. Generally i think photographers jump too quickly to simple conclusions on the subject. A given combination of lens/body/film (or sensor) will output different results between different photographers because the combination reacts differently within various light conditions. All optical constructions have their own unique signature which needs to be learned. In the digital era things have a tendency to drown in mathematical charts and tests. Some Carl - Zeiss lenses are known for their "3D" rendition of light. I suspect this cannot be measured and analyzed although its certainly real (albeit subjective). In my personal experience its all about the optical signature of a specific lens and how it fits each and every photographers unique style.

    Also, like polyglot says, large negatives is key!

  3. #43
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,787
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by polyglot View Post
    A 110/2.8 on 6x7 is approximately the same (in FOV and DOF) as a 55/1.4 on 35mm. There's no easy comparison because the aspect ratio differs: when you frame, do you compare the long side, short side or diagonal?

    A simpler way is to look at the physical aperture size - that will give you a good idea of how much bokeh there is for similar fields of view. 110/2.8 = 55/1.4 = 39.3mm, and 50/1.4 = 35.7mm.

    So many more 35mm systems were made though that good glass for them is easier to find. But if you want large, creamy smooth prints, you need large negatives too.
    Thanks Polyglot,

    Good to get such precise info, my point was that it was very much the type of lens the OP was looking for if he/she chose a MF system.


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  4. #44
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,784
    I have personally found comparing DOF between different formats to be a bit obtuse. Not because they are equivalent or non-equivalent, but because simply by changing the subject/ background to film plane distance within what one can reasonably crop, one can alter apparent DOF and bokeh fairly significantly.

  5. #45
    msbarnes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    382
    Images
    7
    IDK as you can see this can get quite tricky and overly complicated.

    I think that the differences in bokeh within the same format is mostly for photo nerds.

    Keep in mind that if you get the Mamiya then you wouldn't be able to focus as closely (or as accurately) as you would with an SLR/TLR. Getting in closer helps decrease the DOF.


    Untitled by Michael_Sergio_Barnes, on Flickr


    Untitled by Michael_Sergio_Barnes, on Flickr

    Not razor thin but these are up close at f4 with Rolleinar 1's (Rolleiflex close up lenses). f2.8 at these distances is too thin for me.
    Last edited by msbarnes; 04-21-2013 at 01:05 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Michael | tumblr

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    116
    "35mm" doesn't have better bokeh than "6x7". What 35mm lens and what 6x7 lens? A triplet is going to have a lot jitterier bokeh than a double-gauss type no matter the format size.

    Generally speaking though the bigger the format the shallower the depth of field for a given field of view. This is because of the focal length - a 90mm lens is a 90mm lens no matter how you slice it. You can stick that 90mm on a 35mm camera and it will be a long lens (different from being a telephoto!), or if your lens covers 4x5 then it will be a wide angle at that format. A P67 105mm f/2.4 is going to have the same depth of field (approximately) as a Nikkor 105/2.5 if you were to shoot them head to head on 35mm - it just has the capability to cover a larger format. Now, if you were to get an equivalent lens on 6x7 - say a 200mm - then for an equivalent f-stop (f/4 on the 105mm, f/4 on the 200mm) there will be shallower depth of field in comparison, because the focal length is longer.

    The most succinct way to put this is that bigger formats require longer focal lengths for an equivalent field-of-view, and longer focal lengths have shallower depth of field - period.

    And remember - these cameras were used by professionals in their day, pretty much any of them is good enough for amateur work.

  7. #47
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,707
    One way to illustrate what PaulMD saying is to think of a real-world example -the different format cameras Pentax made. Pentax made an adapter to put 6X7 lenses onto the 645. They made an adapter to put 6X7 lenses onto K-mount. A 200mm f4 lens for 6X7, when adapted to 645 or to K-mount cameras, will give the same magnification and Dof with each as the 200mm f4 lenses Pentax made for those mounts.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  8. #48
    Alan Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Jersey .........formerly NYC.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    499
    Mamiya RB67 90mm 6x7 MF (clcik on photo to enlarge)
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	5262942856_b8e77bc4a2_z.jpg 
Views:	69 
Size:	220.3 KB 
ID:	67613

  9. #49
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,787
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by msbarnes View Post
    IDK as you can see this can get quite tricky and overly complicated.

    I think that the differences in bokeh within the same format is mostly for photo nerds.

    Keep in mind that if you get the Mamiya then you wouldn't be able to focus as closely (or as accurately) as you would with an SLR/TLR. Getting in closer helps decrease the DOF.


    Untitled by Michael_Sergio_Barnes, on Flickr


    Untitled by Michael_Sergio_Barnes, on Flickr

    Not razor thin but these are up close at f4 with Rolleinar 1's (Rolleiflex close up lenses). f2.8 at these distances is too thin for me.
    I think you're incorrect about the Mamiya, a Mamiya RZ67 is SPECIFICALLY designed with bellows so it can get SUPER close. MUCH closer than a TRL.


    ~Stone

    Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #50
    TheFlyingCamera's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Washington DC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    8,476
    Blog Entries
    51
    Images
    437
    Stone- he's talking about the Mamiya 6/7 family of rangefinders, not the RB/RZ.

Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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