Think of ditching the L glass

[rdenney]

One principle that emerges in this discussion:

The common operational mode for digital cameras is "spray and pray". But that is only because the camera makes it so easy to do, and we allow ourselves to be seduced by that easiness.

For use with my 5D, I have a 24mm TS-E lens, plus a tilting adapter for Pentacon six lenses, two of which in my collection are shifting perspective-control lenses. That gives me tilt and shift capabilities at 24, 45, and 55mm, plus tilting capabilities at a range of other focal lengths. I think I could deliver pretty well on most architectural photography gigs with that setup, assuming the important stuff--the stuff between my ears--is up to snuff. Getting much out of those lenses requires much of the same careful approach as when using a view camera, and I derive basically the same enjoyment.

But there are also times when I put the 24-105 on the 5D and go into production mode, delegating a lot of authority to the camera. I have to separate photography-for-documentation from photography-for-the-sake-of-photography.

I never expect a small-format image (digital or film) to do the work of a large-format image. It just doesn't contain the necessary information. Demanding such isn't really fair to the advantages of small format, or to the return on the lack-of-convenience investment from large-format.

For those who think moving from zooms to primes will redefine their photography, don't bet on it. I have both, and I can spray and pray just as easily with primes as with zooms. I can also take a contemplative approach with zooms, if I choose to.

I've heard people say that the digital camera has no soul, but I think as much as anything we leave our souls at home when we use them. I'm not sure my Sinar has a soul, either, but it just won't work at all if I don't bring mine with me. One advantage to large format is that it enforces a contemplative approach, but even with that, I've seen (and made) a lot of uninspired images made using large format/film/whatever. That leaves me once again with the conclusion: It ain't the camera.

Rick "remembering when large-format photographers said all the same things about 35mm film that they now say about digital" Denney

[Chris Strobel]

Can't we all just get along together.One of em's bound to nail the shot ehh

[sgelb]

HA! thats a pretty funny picture.. heres my take:

Canon zoom glass is junk. had very little success with it. EF primes IMO have great sharpness and Very nice bokeh. TO me, L glass is not worth it. the 85mm 1.8 is not very much different than the 85L. I sold my whole digital kit back in november then bought the 5DmkII and 2 contax MF lenses on adapters.

I bought the 28 f/2.8 and the 50 f/1.7 I have had excellent results with the 50mm lens. wide open, stopped down whatever. the lens cost 200$ total and it has superb bokeh wide open. however, there are huge issues in focusing this lens. Sometimes it also doesnt fit into the adapter properly and therefore doesnt focus properly. but when it does focus properly, I think it beats canon glass. Its got a tad more contrast than I like but I still like its look.

I will put a few jpgs here to illustrate. theres two portraits. one is of my father (god bless him for putting up with me as a kid) and one of a local poet. both shot with 50mm contax planar f/1.7 T* carl zeiss MMJ (japanese made , probably fuji)

that said, I need autofocus for shooting action. so in time I want to buy the 50mm f/1.4 and the 28 f/1.8 both I have owned before and both I have gotten superb results.

I tried to like nikon, but I could not. what irks me most about nikon is the look, its distinct and very flat. I find as well that canon images have a better DR than nikon, more depth somehow. and absolutely way better in every way than leica.

the third and fourth is an image I took with a graflex optar lens and e64 film (!)believe it or not, this is one of the most detailed and incredible resolved images I have seen. f/16 on a a speed graphic FPS.

these days. I have a super D 4x5 and 3x4 and I love working with them. I love the on the mirror focus, it allows me to do great things!

[Kirk Gittings]

On why one would use AF for architecture: Live View AF is invaluable when shooting static subjects from tripod - much more accurate than MF with tiny dSLR viewfinders, and probably more accurate than "normal" AF as it uses sensor information.

I shoot architecture almost every day with a DSLR, I find it no problem focusing accurately with the viewfinder, even in very dimly lit interiors or twilight exterior shots. It is much easier than focusing on a 4x5 ground glass in dim light, which I exclusively did for 28 years. I have no idea what people are talking about not being able to focus through the the viewfinder. Is this an eyesight issue? Mine is not especially good. The only time I find live view useful is when I have to position the camera in such a way as I cannot see through the viewfinder or with autofocus it is useful only in the rare times when I shoot things like my recent daughters wedding.

[feppe]

I shoot architecture almost every day with a DSLR, I find it no problem focusing accurately with the viewfinder, even in very dimly lit interiors or twilight exterior shots. It is much easier than focusing on a 4x5 ground glass in dim light, which I exclusively did for 28 years. I have no idea what people are talking about not being able to focus through the the viewfinder. Is this an eyesight issue? Mine is not especially good. The only time I find live view useful is when I have to position the camera in such a way as I cannot see through the viewfinder or with autofocus it is useful only in the rare times when I shoot things like my recent daughters wedding.

Good for you.

It's most likely an eyesight issue. I use glasses, so eye relief is an issue.

Even then, there are also a lot of pros on the internets who have great difficulties consistently manual focusing a 20+ megapixel dSLR.

[Drew Wiley]

I use the Nikon 85/1.4 lenses on a FM2N and FM3 for about 90% of my small format
work (except copystand). All manual-focus and very fast with an Intenscreen. Don't
like autofocus anything! Did some scouting last weekend with the Nikon and grabbed
for deer closeups etc which required very quick work. Saw some wonderful possibilities
on my walk, and with similar fog and light conditions forecast tomorrow, am going back
to the same place with the 8X10.

[D. Bryant]

HA! thats a pretty funny picture.. heres my take:

Canon zoom glass is junk. had very little success with it. EF primes IMO have great sharpness and Very nice bokeh. TO me, L glass is not worth it. the 85mm 1.8 is not very much different than the 85L. I sold my whole digital kit back in november then bought the 5DmkII and 2 contax MF lenses on adapters.

I bought the 28 f/2.8 and the 50 f/1.7 I have had excellent results with the 50mm lens. wide open, stopped down whatever. the lens cost 200$ total and it has superb bokeh wide open. however, there are huge issues in focusing this lens. Sometimes it also doesnt fit into the adapter properly and therefore doesnt focus properly. but when it does focus properly, I think it beats canon glass. Its got a tad more contrast than I like but I still like its look.

I will put a few jpgs here to illustrate. theres two portraits. one is of my father (god bless him for putting up with me as a kid) and one of a local poet. both shot with 50mm contax planar f/1.7 T* carl zeiss MMJ (japanese made , probably fuji)

that said, I need autofocus for shooting action. so in time I want to buy the 50mm f/1.4 and the 28 f/1.8 both I have owned before and both I have gotten superb results.

I tried to like nikon, but I could not. what irks me most about nikon is the look, its distinct and very flat. I find as well that canon images have a better DR than nikon, more depth somehow. and absolutely way better in every way than leica.

the third and fourth is an image I took with a graflex optar lens and e64 film (!)believe it or not, this is one of the most detailed and incredible resolved images I have seen. f/16 on a a speed graphic FPS.

these days. I have a super D 4x5 and 3x4 and I love working with them. I love the on the mirror focus, it allows me to do great things!

Hmmm, I thought posting of non-large format images was verboten except in the lounge.

Don Bryant

[sgelb]

repent i must for I have sinned. please father forgive me..

[Kirk Gittings]

Hmmm, I thought posting of non-large format images was verboten except in the lounge.

Don Bryant

You can if you are trying to illustrate a point about LF, such as taking a picture of your LF camera, but I don't see it in this case.

[mercadov]

Shuan,

I was in the same boat with digital, I own Nik’s, Can’s and medium format, after several years of shooting digital I recently decided to jump into LF. Here’s my take, keep your digital gear you could always use it for metering. Check out Jo Lommen, starting off with a Graflex Speed is an enjoyable tool and not to expensive for learning hands on LF skills. In time you’ll know which LF setup feels right for you. If you decide to sell your 85L for a bargain price shoot me an email, this is an excellent lens for shooting HD in manual focus.
~vm~