[LRFlex] Re: Another one visits the Dark Side...

Guys -

Thanks for your encouragement, it always means more coming from those with well-earned perspectives and personal work which makes them even clearer.

I guess I feel that the issue of DSLRs is just another one of those "horses for courses" deals. I don't think I'll be going after any really big prints or "fine art" sort of stuff, but for many applications (such as most of the stuff I actually get to bill for) this digi thing is looking pretty attractive.

Funny thing about these trees. When I come back to town after the holidays I'd be interested in many of your opinions on optimum scanning and sharpening guidelines for various end products (printing and web posting, in particular.) I actually had a few days a coupla weeks ago where I became somewhat obsessed by some trees around here, and I shot a roll of slow B&W in my M2 (which looks stunning under the 30x magnifier). I scanned the film at various resolutions from 600 to 4800 ppi and came to the disquieting conclusion that the 600 ppi scans (displayed at 100%) looked sharpest on my computer screens! It's like what they say about high contrast at the coarser levels of resolution giving a greater impression of sharpness than higher resolution with lower contrast at the coarser levels...

Still, my confidence in dealing with these issues has been quite shaken...

Bob Palmieri



On Mar 23, 2005, at 6:41 PM, Jim Hemenway wrote:

Agreed!  I really like the shot of the "hairy" trees!

Jim


Steve Barbour wrote:
with nice shots like this the first time round, I suspect you are presently surprised and encouraged by the dark side Bob....
:-) Steve
Bob Palmieri wrote: 

Y'all...

I recall that a while ago there was some discussion of testing the suitability of some cheap wides for use on DSLR's, 'specially Canon EOS cameras.

Well, on Monday I had an evening gig shooting some stills of musicians who were on a soundstage faking performances for a 5-camera video shoot. I figured that the lighting would probably be taken care of, and for various reasons it seemed like a good time to shoot with a DSLR (which I don't own...) So on the way to the gig I stopped by the studio of another photographer who was quite happy to lend me a D60 for a coupla days. He was pretty amused to find out that not only had I never shot with a DSLR. I hadn't even shot with an EOS film camera before.

Next stop was Fotodiox for an adapter; the company headquarters just happened to be on the way to the gig, which was about 70 miles northwest of my condo in downtown Chicago.

So, I had time to seek out a good place to get my fingers wet with the unknown axe; this turned out to be a place called Chain O'Lakes State Park. I tried to find something to shoot with my 24mm 2.8 Vivitar T-mount:

http://www.pbase.com/bobsworld/image/41135954


Also shot some well-lit trees with my 180 (1st version)

http://www.pbase.com/bobsworld/image/41136180


Not to mention some Sand-Hill Cranes with the 400 Telyt:

http://www.pbase.com/bobsworld/image/41135855


All the images have been resampled into small JPEG's with a bit of the usual sharpening - not what I would consider any sort of rigorous test but a good real-world view of how the stuff works together. If anyone needs to see the 2K x 3K files (which looked quite good to me) I'll be glad to pass them along. In any case,the 24 looked quite good to me (stopped down to 5.6-8, anyway.)

I suppose I need to find out how best to post images for evaluation. Any suggestions about how big, sharpenig/no sharpening, resampling, etc. would be appreciated.


------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
   www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
   www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
   www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
   www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: