Le 4 sept. 12 à 21:11, Ken Norton a écrit :
> Dawid wrote:
>> Just two? That's a bit restrictive, but if that is your constraint,
>> then
>> the 35-80 (duh), and either a wide (24) or a telephoto (200/4 or even
>> longer, I don't know your style).
>
> Well, Dawid, it was YOUR suggestion of only two lenses. ;)
>
> It's interesting that we now have two suggestions for the 35-80. I was
> actually thinking about leaving that behind. I could just borrow
> Joel's. :)
>
>
>> * Will be tripod-bound mostly, or lots of hand-held?
>> * Deep DOF or shallow DOF? (for me, always shallow...)
>
> Mostly tripod-based. When Joel and I shoot together, we're pretty much
> glued to our tripods. Well, I do tend to use the monopod a lot, but
> that's
> with digital. With film, I'll be using the tripod more often.
>
>
>> If this were me (I never owned the 35-80) I would have done:
>> * 24/2.8
>> * 50/1.4
>> * 100/2
>> * 300/4.5
>> * Ilford Pan F at ISO32
>> * Tripod
>
> Hmm. That's remarkably close to what I was thinking too. The 24/2.8
> is a
> must-have lens. I've got specific compositions that require that
> lens. The
> 50/1.4, which is usually my leave-behind lens (50mm not being overly
> exciting to me) will likely see a lot of use because of how it works
> for
> color photography. The 100/2 is a given. Absolutely no way that that
> lens
> is being left behind.
If the 35-80 is sharp enough why bother? Just crop :-)
> The 300/4.5 is the challenge lens. I'm inclined to
> leave the 200/4 behind, but will be bringing the AT-X 100-300. By
> bringing
> the AT-X, the 300/4.5 becomes a duplicate. However, there are few,
> if any,
> lenses that render a scene like the 300/4.5. It's in a class all
> it's own.
>
> The 35-80 is the question mark. I'm running into two problems with it.
> First of all, the filter-ring size is not compatible with my B&W
> filters.
Cheap converters are available on the bay - me stupid?
> Secondly, in my experience, the 35-80 seems to render for color
> images a
> little better than B&W images. Not necessarily in portraiture, but in
> landscape-style photography. Thirdly, (I can't count), it is
> essentially a
> duplication of focal lengths. It's also heavy.
>
Tripod? what for? macro? portrait? using live-view on a nikon? another
myth that needs debunking I bet ;-)
double ;-)
triple this for good measure ...
>
>> Use the tripod, forget the spontaneous shots - you've got a cellphone
>> cam for those (and they suck in anyway). Print the crap out of the
>> Pan F
>> negs when you come back. Can you see the creamy tones already? The
>> sparkling highlights? The smooth mid-tones? The endless dynamic
>> range?
>>
>> Ahhh.... Pan F... There is no substitute.
I didn't know PAN F still existed - brings me ages back when I used to
buy it in 25 meters rolls and cut my own strips/rolls in my student
bedroom :-)
I can still smell it :-)
>
> Yes, Pan F is wonderful stuff. But I really prefer it in medium-
> format than
> in 35mm. I was thinking about picking up a few rolls of Efke 25...
> In all
> honesty, though, I'm going to compromise in a huge way. Don't gag,
> but my
> film of choice for this trip is Plus-X to be processed in DD-X.
> Kodak Ektar
> 100 or Provia 160 will take care of the low-speed color and I've got
> a few
> rolls of NPZ left for the grainy-color stuff.
>
> If I did bring JUST two lenses and one body, it would be the OM-3Ti
> with
> 24/2.8 and 100/2. But that won't be necessary because I have a wheeled
> camera bag that has the "Jeep" brand name on it.
>
> --
> Ken Norton
> ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.zone-10.com
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|