So, have you given up on digital then Scott.
Dave
On Jan 11, 2008 6:24 PM, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey, gang. I'm contemplating a portrait lens for the 645. I have no
foreseeable need for the leaf shutter on the 135, and both focal lengths
are acceptable. Plus, the 150 is a
David J Brooks wrote:
So, have you given up on digital then Scott.
Not so much given up, but rather given it the freakin' boot. ;)
(Kidding. Retract the claws already.)
Christie has the K100D and the 750z is still around. I'll reach for one
of those for random snapshots and chasing the
Op Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:24:08 +0100 schreef Scott Loveless
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hey, gang. I'm contemplating a portrait lens for the 645. I have no
foreseeable need for the leaf shutter on the 135, and both focal lengths
are acceptable. Plus, the 150 is a bit faster, so I'm leaning towards
Hey, gang. I'm contemplating a portrait lens for the 645. I have no
foreseeable need for the leaf shutter on the 135, and both focal lengths
are acceptable. Plus, the 150 is a bit faster, so I'm leaning towards
that one. Anybody have any insight to share about the quality of these
lenses
Scott Loveless writes...
Hey, gang. I'm contemplating a portrait lens for the 645.
If you don't mind being silly, there is a non-Pentax option that is
interesting and inexpensive. For many years, Carl Zeiss Jena built a
variation of the famed Olympia Sonnar for the Pentacon Six mount. It
is
Scott, I used a 645 outfit back when I was actively doing portraits
and weddings.
Because of the size constraints of my studio, I chose the 120 macro as
my portrait lens. It would allow full lengths at the max distance
available to me and yet still work for head shots. Occasionally I
would use the
Walter Hamler wrote:
Scott, I used a 645 outfit back when I was actively doing portraits
and weddings.
Because of the size constraints of my studio, I chose the 120 macro as
my portrait lens. It would allow full lengths at the max distance
available to me and yet still work for head shots.
Hmmm. A leaf shutter is great on a portrait lens because you can use
fill flash on outdoor portraits. The 165 leaf shutter lens was my
portrait lens of choice on the 6x7.
Paul
A 6x7, 165/4 leaf-shutter lens outdoor portrait with flash and
reflector providing fill:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Hmmm. A leaf shutter is great on a portrait lens because you can use
fill flash on outdoor portraits. The 165 leaf shutter lens was my
portrait lens of choice on the 6x7.
Paul
A 6x7, 165/4 leaf-shutter lens outdoor portrait with flash and
reflector providing
- Original Message -
From: Scott Loveless
Subject: Re: 135LS or 150 for 645
Thanks, Paul. It's still a consideration, but I really don't use flash
that often (though I probably should). I think if I ever set up a
studio I may start out with hot lights anyway.
I shot a bagload
I'll second the leaf shutter. When I was shooting the 67, I started
with a 165/2.8 for shooting portraits. I eventually bought the 165/4
leaf shutter as I found that to be more useful. Fill flash can make a
very major difference in outdoor work.
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Friday, January 11,
11 matches
Mail list logo
