Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, Digital Image Studio wrote: On static subjects a combination of image combining (can secure (1.21 jigawatts, etc, much deleted crunchy bits) to do manually but there are some really nice automation kits out there for serious work. Yow, am I the only one who finds all the digital bits of New Photography boring? I look for reasons to NOT do work at a computer, not seek them out. Sure, points and clicks can leave my LF gear in the shade, but I'd much rather be out in the shade, taking a photograph with a lovingly crafed view camera than indoors waving a mouse. Hell, the reason I bought a DSLR finally is so I could spend more time TAKING pictures and less time wasting on things like darkrooms, scanning, futzing in PS, etc. -shrug- I guess my priorities are all off. Maybe I shouldn't have given this digital revolution a shot, hey, is there room by JCO for another luddite? I want back in... ;) -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
On 17/10/06, gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, Digital Image Studio wrote: On static subjects a combination of image combining (can secure (1.21 jigawatts, etc, much deleted crunchy bits) to do manually but there are some really nice automation kits out there for serious work. Yow, am I the only one who finds all the digital bits of New Photography boring? I look for reasons to NOT do work at a computer, not seek them out. Sure, points and clicks can leave my LF gear in the shade, but I'd much rather be out in the shade, taking a photograph with a lovingly crafed view camera than indoors waving a mouse. Hell, the reason I bought a DSLR finally is so I could spend more time TAKING pictures and less time wasting on things like darkrooms, scanning, futzing in PS, etc. -shrug- I guess my priorities are all off. Maybe I shouldn't have given this digital revolution a shot, hey, is there room by JCO for another luddite? I want back in... ;) I enjoy the process of taking a photo but I also enjoy the making of a photo. The fact is that large format photography is expensive and it's a hassle to have processed, it's also often unwieldy especially if you are also lugging about SLRs etc. With my little back pack of gear when I'm travelling I can have all my kit with me so I don't have to leave bit unattended. I can trudge up a mountain side and take macros along the way then make a honking pano at the top. It's practicality, the post processing just allows me to do a whole lot more with less kit. It's no imposition really, I actually enjoy regaining complete control over the process, in the old days I was beholden to lab techs. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet Your assumption is maximum depth of field is what is Always needed when its not. With tilts and swings You can entire offset planes in focus with selective (minimal) DOF if needed. You cant do that with photoshop After the fact. Umm, no. That is what you are presuming I mean when I say sufficient depth of field is easier to secure. The original post is intact below so you can refamiliarize yourself if you need to. I did say in my first post on the subject (this is my third, and last) that a view camera was better if the person is serious about architectural photography. I expect you just overlooked this. If you are serious about architectural photography, a view camera is better. Anyway, for a more casual approach, an APS DSLR and the tools available in Photoshop are sufficient for many people. I realize that you are not one of these people, and that as far as you are concerned, anything less than a view camera is unsuitable for architectural photography, so we can drop this one now. William Robb With the smaller format, depth of field is generally easy enough to secure in architectural work. After that it becomes a question of compromise: Is the output from the smaller format camera good enough for the intended purpose? That is something that neither you, nor I, can answer for someone else. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
JCO, It is a waste of time trying to converse with an idiot like you. I will not bother. G On Oct 14, 2006, at 2:13 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: You clueless. First of all there are EXTERIORS As well as interiors where you are going to Need more rise than the shift lenses for medium Format and 35mm are going to be able to offer. Secondly you are very limited on focal lengths With medium format and 35mm shift/tilt lenses. Lastly I said SERIOUS architectural photography, Which means being able to do exactly what the Customer wants, not something close ( or far from it). View camera RULE when it comes to architechure, problably More than any other genre of photography as a matter of fact Due to the much more flexible geometry of the camera itself. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Godfrey DiGiorgi Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:59 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet On Oct 13, 2006, at 8:11 PM, Inet Shopper wrote: Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco JCO: This is nonsense. Many many many architectural interior photographs are made with Hasselblad SWC cameras and other wide-field cameras that do not have tilts and shifts. I would wager that the majority of architectural shots sold to magazines are not made with view cameras, and haven't been for years. Particularly interior work. This is not to say that cameras with shift and tilt are not advantageous for architectural work. They are. But unless you are doing this kind of work as a speciality and need control on that order, yes, you need a good view camera. But I've had a couple of commissions done with the Pentax DS and DA14mm lens that is fully accepted as interior architectural work. I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? ... Tilt/shift lenses allow a limited amount of correction for this kind of work. Unfortunately, most of them are a little too long in focal length to be particularly useful for architectural work on a 16x24mm sensor camera. You're better off using a wide field lens with minimal rectilinear distortion (like the DA14) and using image processing software to do any keystone corrections required. Thanks for the inputs. Most of my picture-taking is done while travelling, so a zoom is definitely more convenient than a bagful of lenses. As for architecture, here are some examples of architecture that I photograph: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ If the link works, you can see that I don't shoot brick walls ;-) so if the wavy/barrel distortion is not too obvious, I'm OK. Normally, the limiting factor is me, not the equipment. And if the final budget dictates either the 16-45 alone, or the kit 18-55 plus one (used) fast lens, then I'm going with the latter. For the kind of travel work I see on this page (some of it quite nice...), the 16-45 will likely do quite well. The 18-55 would probably do ok too. My travel kit this year is a DA21, FA35 and FA77. Compact, light, and a nice range with good speed. I often include the DA14 as well, but was a little challenged for space on this trip. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006, J. C. O'Connell wrote: You clueless. JC I have had enough. Your language is unacceptable. Bye-bye. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? According to this page: http://www.ohse.de/uwe/articles/shift-tilt.html for Pentax K-mount cameras, there are shift and tilt/shift lenses available from: Pentax(!): SMC A 28mm f3.5 shift Schneider-Kreuznach: 28mm f2.8 shift, 35mm f4 shift (M42) Zavod Arsenal: 35mm f2.8 shift and tilt/shift, 80mm f2.8 tilt/shift Also, at: http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/pentax_cameras_lenses.htm There are 2 Russian lenses of interest - a 35mm f2.8 tilt/shift, and an 80mm f2.8 tilt/shift. So it seems all is not lost for Pentax users. The Zavod Arsenal and Russian lenses at least offer tilt/shift which should correct fully for perspective, at least within their design limits. Disclaimer: I have never used a view camera, so there may indeed be adjustments possible with a view camera, that cannot be similarly achieved with a tilt/shift lens on an SLR. I will be happy to be corrected. But anyway I guess I don't qualify as a serious architecture photographer... I'm not too concerned about perspective correction - I usually just try to hold the camera level, and I sometimes use the perspective distortion for dramatic shots. I'm more concerned about wavy/barrel distortion. In fact, all the wide-to-normal or wide-to-small tele zoom lenses that I know show too much distortion for serious architecture photography. That is also the case with the 16-45, judging from the photos I have seen and user reports. But I also think that many zooms lenses are useful for that kind of photography if the photographer understands their limitations and can live with them, or is prepared to correct the shots in post processing. Carlos Thanks for the inputs. Most of my picture-taking is done while travelling, so a zoom is definitely more convenient than a bagful of lenses. As for architecture, here are some examples of architecture that I photograph: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ If the link works, you can see that I don't shoot brick walls ;-) so if the wavy/barrel distortion is not too obvious, I'm OK. Normally, the limiting factor is me, not the equipment. And if the final budget dictates either the 16-45 alone, or the kit 18-55 plus one (used) fast lens, then I'm going with the latter. Benjamin __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
Yes, you can do LIMITED tilting and shifting With these speciality lenses but view cameras Allow much more shift/tilt/swings and with essentially All lenses you mount on the cameras (provided They have enough coverage, that's up to the buyer ). Never heard of the Zovod lenses, are they any good? jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Inet Shopper Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 3:11 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? According to this page: http://www.ohse.de/uwe/articles/shift-tilt.html for Pentax K-mount cameras, there are shift and tilt/shift lenses available from: Pentax(!): SMC A 28mm f3.5 shift Schneider-Kreuznach: 28mm f2.8 shift, 35mm f4 shift (M42) Zavod Arsenal: 35mm f2.8 shift and tilt/shift, 80mm f2.8 tilt/shift Also, at: http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/pentax_cameras_lenses.htm There are 2 Russian lenses of interest - a 35mm f2.8 tilt/shift, and an 80mm f2.8 tilt/shift. So it seems all is not lost for Pentax users. The Zavod Arsenal and Russian lenses at least offer tilt/shift which should correct fully for perspective, at least within their design limits. Disclaimer: I have never used a view camera, so there may indeed be adjustments possible with a view camera, that cannot be similarly achieved with a tilt/shift lens on an SLR. I will be happy to be corrected. But anyway I guess I don't qualify as a serious architecture photographer... I'm not too concerned about perspective correction - I usually just try to hold the camera level, and I sometimes use the perspective distortion for dramatic shots. I'm more concerned about wavy/barrel distortion. In fact, all the wide-to-normal or wide-to-small tele zoom lenses that I know show too much distortion for serious architecture photography. That is also the case with the 16-45, judging from the photos I have seen and user reports. But I also think that many zooms lenses are useful for that kind of photography if the photographer understands their limitations and can live with them, or is prepared to correct the shots in post processing. Carlos Thanks for the inputs. Most of my picture-taking is done while travelling, so a zoom is definitely more convenient than a bagful of lenses. As for architecture, here are some examples of architecture that I photograph: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ If the link works, you can see that I don't shoot brick walls ;-) so if the wavy/barrel distortion is not too obvious, I'm OK. Normally, the limiting factor is me, not the equipment. And if the final budget dictates either the 16-45 alone, or the kit 18-55 plus one (used) fast lens, then I'm going with the latter. Benjamin __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
You can accomplish better perspective correctin in PhotoShop than you can with the limited 35mm or MF shift lenses. In fact, you can control perspective quite nicely using the various controls available in Photoshop's Transform and Free Transform. Of course you can't come close to the resolution of the large format cameras, but with the right lensing and a bit of PS experience, you can equal the perspective control capabilities of the view camera. Paul -- Original message -- From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes, you can do LIMITED tilting and shifting With these speciality lenses but view cameras Allow much more shift/tilt/swings and with essentially All lenses you mount on the cameras (provided They have enough coverage, that's up to the buyer ). Never heard of the Zovod lenses, are they any good? jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Inet Shopper Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 3:11 PM To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? According to this page: http://www.ohse.de/uwe/articles/shift-tilt.html for Pentax K-mount cameras, there are shift and tilt/shift lenses available from: Pentax(!): SMC A 28mm f3.5 shift Schneider-Kreuznach: 28mm f2.8 shift, 35mm f4 shift (M42) Zavod Arsenal: 35mm f2.8 shift and tilt/shift, 80mm f2.8 tilt/shift Also, at: http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/pentax_cameras_lenses.htm There are 2 Russian lenses of interest - a 35mm f2.8 tilt/shift, and an 80mm f2.8 tilt/shift. So it seems all is not lost for Pentax users. The Zavod Arsenal and Russian lenses at least offer tilt/shift which should correct fully for perspective, at least within their design limits. Disclaimer: I have never used a view camera, so there may indeed be adjustments possible with a view camera, that cannot be similarly achieved with a tilt/shift lens on an SLR. I will be happy to be corrected. But anyway I guess I don't qualify as a serious architecture photographer... I'm not too concerned about perspective correction - I usually just try to hold the camera level, and I sometimes use the perspective distortion for dramatic shots. I'm more concerned about wavy/barrel distortion. In fact, all the wide-to-normal or wide-to-small tele zoom lenses that I know show too much distortion for serious architecture photography. That is also the case with the 16-45, judging from the photos I have seen and user reports. But I also think that many zooms lenses are useful for that kind of photography if the photographer understands their limitations and can live with them, or is prepared to correct the shots in post processing. Carlos Thanks for the inputs. Most of my picture-taking is done while travelling, so a zoom is definitely more convenient than a bagful of lenses. As for architecture, here are some examples of architecture that I photograph: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ If the link works, you can see that I don't shoot brick walls ;-) so if the wavy/barrel distortion is not too obvious, I'm OK. Normally, the limiting factor is me, not the equipment. And if the final budget dictates either the 16-45 alone, or the kit 18-55 plus one (used) fast lens, then I'm going with the latter. Benjamin __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
- Original Message - From: Inet Shopper Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? Shift lenses help, and you can do a lot of perspective correction using Photoshop as well. I doubt John has much knowledge of Photoshop, since he isn't using digital. If you are serious about architectural photography, a view camera is better. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
If I am the john you are reffering to, I do use Photoshop. Not sure which John you are talking about. Photoshop can do perspective control with a loss in Resolution but it cant do what tilts and swings Do which is control plane of focus/DOF. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Robb Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 4:25 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet - Original Message - From: Inet Shopper Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? Shift lenses help, and you can do a lot of perspective correction using Photoshop as well. I doubt John has much knowledge of Photoshop, since he isn't using digital. If you are serious about architectural photography, a view camera is better. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
On Oct 13, 2006, at 8:11 PM, Inet Shopper wrote: Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco JCO: This is nonsense. Many many many architectural interior photographs are made with Hasselblad SWC cameras and other wide-field cameras that do not have tilts and shifts. I would wager that the majority of architectural shots sold to magazines are not made with view cameras, and haven't been for years. Particularly interior work. This is not to say that cameras with shift and tilt are not advantageous for architectural work. They are. But unless you are doing this kind of work as a speciality and need control on that order, yes, you need a good view camera. But I've had a couple of commissions done with the Pentax DS and DA14mm lens that is fully accepted as interior architectural work. I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? ... Tilt/shift lenses allow a limited amount of correction for this kind of work. Unfortunately, most of them are a little too long in focal length to be particularly useful for architectural work on a 16x24mm sensor camera. You're better off using a wide field lens with minimal rectilinear distortion (like the DA14) and using image processing software to do any keystone corrections required. Thanks for the inputs. Most of my picture-taking is done while travelling, so a zoom is definitely more convenient than a bagful of lenses. As for architecture, here are some examples of architecture that I photograph: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ If the link works, you can see that I don't shoot brick walls ;-) so if the wavy/barrel distortion is not too obvious, I'm OK. Normally, the limiting factor is me, not the equipment. And if the final budget dictates either the 16-45 alone, or the kit 18-55 plus one (used) fast lens, then I'm going with the latter. For the kind of travel work I see on this page (some of it quite nice...), the 16-45 will likely do quite well. The 18-55 would probably do ok too. My travel kit this year is a DA21, FA35 and FA77. Compact, light, and a nice range with good speed. I often include the DA14 as well, but was a little challenged for space on this trip. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
- Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet If I am the john you are reffering to, I do use Photoshop. Not sure which John you are talking about. Photoshop can do perspective control with a loss in Resolution but it cant do what tilts and swings Do which is control plane of focus/DOF. With the smaller format, depth of field is generally easy enough to secure in architectural work. After that it becomes a question of compromise: Is the output from the smaller format camera good enough for the intended purpose? That is something that neither you, nor I, can answer for someone else. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
You clueless. First of all there are EXTERIORS As well as interiors where you are going to Need more rise than the shift lenses for medium Format and 35mm are going to be able to offer. Secondly you are very limited on focal lengths With medium format and 35mm shift/tilt lenses. Lastly I said SERIOUS architectural photography, Which means being able to do exactly what the Customer wants, not something close ( or far from it). View camera RULE when it comes to architechure, problably More than any other genre of photography as a matter of fact Due to the much more flexible geometry of the camera itself. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Godfrey DiGiorgi Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:59 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet On Oct 13, 2006, at 8:11 PM, Inet Shopper wrote: Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco JCO: This is nonsense. Many many many architectural interior photographs are made with Hasselblad SWC cameras and other wide-field cameras that do not have tilts and shifts. I would wager that the majority of architectural shots sold to magazines are not made with view cameras, and haven't been for years. Particularly interior work. This is not to say that cameras with shift and tilt are not advantageous for architectural work. They are. But unless you are doing this kind of work as a speciality and need control on that order, yes, you need a good view camera. But I've had a couple of commissions done with the Pentax DS and DA14mm lens that is fully accepted as interior architectural work. I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? ... Tilt/shift lenses allow a limited amount of correction for this kind of work. Unfortunately, most of them are a little too long in focal length to be particularly useful for architectural work on a 16x24mm sensor camera. You're better off using a wide field lens with minimal rectilinear distortion (like the DA14) and using image processing software to do any keystone corrections required. Thanks for the inputs. Most of my picture-taking is done while travelling, so a zoom is definitely more convenient than a bagful of lenses. As for architecture, here are some examples of architecture that I photograph: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ If the link works, you can see that I don't shoot brick walls ;-) so if the wavy/barrel distortion is not too obvious, I'm OK. Normally, the limiting factor is me, not the equipment. And if the final budget dictates either the 16-45 alone, or the kit 18-55 plus one (used) fast lens, then I'm going with the latter. For the kind of travel work I see on this page (some of it quite nice...), the 16-45 will likely do quite well. The 18-55 would probably do ok too. My travel kit this year is a DA21, FA35 and FA77. Compact, light, and a nice range with good speed. I often include the DA14 as well, but was a little challenged for space on this trip. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
Your assumption is maximum depth of field is what is Always needed when its not. With tilts and swings You can entire offset planes in focus with selective (minimal) DOF if needed. You cant do that with photoshop After the fact. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Robb Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:05 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell Subject: RE: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet If I am the john you are reffering to, I do use Photoshop. Not sure which John you are talking about. Photoshop can do perspective control with a loss in Resolution but it cant do what tilts and swings Do which is control plane of focus/DOF. With the smaller format, depth of field is generally easy enough to secure in architectural work. After that it becomes a question of compromise: Is the output from the smaller format camera good enough for the intended purpose? That is something that neither you, nor I, can answer for someone else. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
Also, for landscape work. That is how you get everything from the blades of grass in front of the camera to the mountains in the background sharp. Folks ought to read a good book on view camera techniques just so they will know what can be done, even if they have no interest in doing it themselves. A tilt shift lens gives you the movements of a press camera (front only), not those of a full view camera which has front and back movements. As for Photoshop, a kludge is better than nothing, but it ain't the real thing. Interestingly there are things you can not do with a view camera that you can easily do with 35mm/digital, and vis versa. To do a full range of photography you really need both. However most large format users are pretty much hidden from most of the public unlike the wedding and photojournalist crowd, so are not as well known. It is not simply a just matter of a bigger negative, it is a matter of control. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Inet Shopper Subject: Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet Sorry guys but you really cant do serious Architechure with any pentax cameras or Lenses because you need full camera movements That only a view camera can provide for architecture. Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. jco I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? Shift lenses help, and you can do a lot of perspective correction using Photoshop as well. I doubt John has much knowledge of Photoshop, since he isn't using digital. If you are serious about architectural photography, a view camera is better. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Pentax DSLR - some questions before I decide Inet
On 14/10/06, graywolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, for landscape work. That is how you get everything from the blades of grass in front of the camera to the mountains in the background sharp. Folks ought to read a good book on view camera techniques just so they will know what can be done, even if they have no interest in doing it themselves. A tilt shift lens gives you the movements of a press camera (front only), not those of a full view camera which has front and back movements. As for Photoshop, a kludge is better than nothing, but it ain't the real thing. On static subjects a combination of image combining (can secure infinite DOF at wide open apertures if required and/or ultra-wide latitude) and multi-row image stitching of even relatively low res digi shots will even put LF in the shade now. Granted the it's tedious to do manually but there are some really nice automation kits out there for serious work. http://www.peaceriverstudios.com/pixorb/index.html http://www.roundshot-deutschland.de/english/karline_rodeon_modular.html -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
