• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Men at work

Nicolas Claris

Administrator/Moderator
40 mm - ISO 200 - ƒ4 - 1/5s

A 100 feet (30 meters) sailing boat under construction…

The roof top has just been put delicately on the deck.



[EDIT]I have reworked the derawtization… please see below
I have not deleted the above image for the good understanding of the discussion. [/EDIT]
 
Last edited:

John_Nevill

New member
How does the DR compare against the 1DsMkIII?

The shadows (workman's hair and surround) look blotchy, but that could be the jpg compression.
 

Nicolas Claris

Administrator/Moderator
How does the DR compare against the 1DsMkIII?

The shadows (workman's hair and surround) look blotchy, but that could be the jpg compression.
Bonsoir John
this goes with my comments on DOF/ƒ4
the standing guy is OOF

Remember also that the original file is 6668x4992 pixels downsizing for the web does creates unwanted effects.

The conjugaison of both "issues" too small aperture for the subject (operator fault!) and compression are not desserving the camera…
 

John_Nevill

New member
Nicolas,

Somehow I thought it was the jpeg compression, the resolution looks superb.

I bet its going to be quite a challenge working with mixed light.

Do you aim to use for yacht interiors? I'd like to see some long exposure night shots with one.

Although this kit is well out of my league I'm afraid!

I do look forward to your diary and some excellent images.
 

Eric Hiss

New member
those samples look terrible

Hi Nicolas,
In my experience, the 40mm lens is incredibly sharp with high contrast and capable of rendering very fine detail. The lens clearly outresolves the sensor in my camera. I can believe that at a slow 1/4 s exposure the man standing could be blurry but actually the whole image looks soft even in the focal plane. Did you use a tripod for this shot?

So far these samples you have posted do not stand up well to what I am getting with my 6008 AF and Phase p20 back with the 40mm f/3.5 lens. I am trying to figure out why. The files appear to have too much sharpening or too big a radius in them to make meaningful comparisons on detail. Another question - are you setting the white and black points before converting the files?

To illustrate how good the 40mm lens can be, here's a just a snap shot from last week looking out from my studio with my 40mm. Was taken on a tripod at ISO 50. Can't recall the f/stop - sorry.
http://www.eh21.com/example pics/P20/CF006400-web.jpg

Here's a full sized jpeg showing crops from the above. Examine the ID plates riveted onto the boxes, both in the center of the frame and on the outside edge of the frame. Also take a look at the foreground crop.
http://www.eh21.com/example pics/P20/CF006400h-crops-only.jpg
 
Last edited:

Nicolas Claris

Administrator/Moderator
Hi Eric
please do not forget I have this lens since one day only… And I am on y way to figure a workflow that fit me.
This shot was not on tripod (had no time for this) It is a tricky place to shoot, not like an outdoor sunny place!
My choice of using 200 iso was certainly not the best one as I had to have a too long exposure time (as camera was not mounted on tripod).
I also have to find a better way, so I agree with you on that point, to sharpen these files, the're so different from Canon's…

I'll post another picture where the definition is much better (in the night shot thread)
 

Eric Hiss

New member
Hi Eric
please do not forget I have this lens since one day only… And I am on y way to figure a workflow that fit me.
This shot was not on tripod (had no time for this) It is a tricky place to shoot, not like an outdoor sunny place!
My choice of using 200 iso was certainly not the best one as I had to have a too long exposure time (as camera was not mounted on tripod).
I also have to find a better way, so I agree with you on that point, to sharpen these files, the're so different from Canon's…

I'll post another picture where the definition is much better (in the night shot thread)
I'm looking forward to it as I want to evaluate if its worth upgrading my 6008 AF to a Hy6 or not - I know what the lenses can do, but not the Sinar back or the in camera features such as metering.

In my samples I used the default sharpening with C1 which might be too much as well. Anyhow you did okay for 1/4 second hand held. That's hard to do.

For everyone reading the thread, what this is highlighting is that medium format takes more light and a higher number f/stop (smaller actual aperture) to achieve the same DOF as with 35mm DSLRs. Combine that with the fact that MFDB like low ISO and you'll see its much harder to work with MF. But the results can be really impressive when everything comes together.

Regards,
Eric
 

Nicolas Claris

Administrator/Moderator
Hi John

Yes I'll do some yacht interiors, but don't know when…
Yes mixed light is a bit tricky, but it is more a software question than shooting, grey card just don't help in mixed lighting…

You can see a night shot 6 seconds-400 iso jsut posted there

hanks for taking time to look at these…

Nicolas,

Somehow I thought it was the jpeg compression, the resolution looks superb.

I bet its going to be quite a challenge working with mixed light.

Do you aim to use for yacht interiors? I'd like to see some long exposure night shots with one.

Although this kit is well out of my league I'm afraid!

I do look forward to your diary and some excellent images.
 

Nicolas Claris

Administrator/Moderator
Hi all
Thanks to Eric comments, I went back to work on the workflow…

This image is lacking of DOF, this was already known (as well as the use of a tripod!), but Eric did point some blotchy effects and some color shifts…
This image is tricky because there are so many different light sources…
I have experienced in the past that in such case, even the excellent grey card from Whitbal cannot be of real help… so it comes all during the derawtization process (better than in PP on tif).

So here's a new try! colors look more natural to me and images seems less blotchy.
BTW I did a slight crop on left and top.

I have deleted the hires jpeg from the original post, but, certainly more easy for everybody, have added below a 100% crop. Sarting from a 6600 pixel image to "only" 1100 posted on the web creates a lot of indesirable issues…



100% crop:


Any comments? is it improved for you?
 
For everyone reading the thread, what this is highlighting is that medium format takes more light and a higher number f/stop (smaller actual aperture) to achieve the same DOF as with 35mm DSLRs. Combine that with the fact that MFDB like low ISO and you'll see its much harder to work with MF. But the results can be really impressive when everything comes together.
Yes, it's an important point to stress for those who are not used to shooting on larger formats. More light is needed to accomplish equivalent exposure quality.

Bart
 
Top