I do have the circular polarizer designed for the Mamiya 6, but none for the Fuji TX1.
Lately however, I’ve been finding my rangefinder cameras lacking and limiting in some landscape shooting scenarios, particularly when I need to use filters and a polarizer.
BRONICA SQ A SAMPLE PHOTOS PLUS
“Pirate’s Tower” in Laguna Beach, California / Fujifilm TX-1 (aka Hasselblad XPan) camera / Hasselblad 45mm lens / Ilford HP5 Plus 400 135 film / Nikon Coolscan V-ED (LS-50) scanner
BRONICA SQ A SAMPLE PHOTOS PRO
“Pirate’s Tower” in Laguna Beach, California / Mamiya 6 Camera / Mamiya 50mm lens / Ilford Delta ASA100 120 film / Epson V750 Pro scanner The compact size of these cameras and lenses helps when traveling, allowing for a smaller and lighter pack of gear. I enjoy shooting the 6×6 square and 1×2.7 panoramic aspects ratios interchangeably and the challenge of finding compositions that work for both. I do mostly landscapes, scenery, travel and street photography. I had recently returned to film photography after shooting digital since 2010.
I favor a representation of the physical world in a more subtle form.For quite some time I have been enjoying the Mamiya 6 with its trio of 50/75/150mm lenses, alongside the Fujifilm TX-1 (aka Hasselblad Xpan) panoramic camera. Try as I might, i can never get to like Tri-X: it's too blunt for me. On the subject of HP5+ lacking contrast, I agree as well! It's my favourite B&W film, and I love the richness of the blacks. I've avoided this so far since as it is I have so little time for actual shooting, so developing + scanning adds another few hours a week or so. It's making me reconsider doing my own developing and scanning. This doesn't bother me per se, but I've noticed The Darkroom's quality control of late is pretty dismal. The upside of this is that you can select contrast in post (much like a flat RAW file), whereas an overly contrasts jpeg scan is more difficult to fix. Going off the examples you’ve posted, I think the lab has the black point set way too low (irrespective of possible development and exposure issues). Interesting comment, I’ve never found HP5+ to be low contrast. I don't think I'd see that much detail in the shadows if that were the case (?)Īnyhow, will report back when I get the negatives. So if I underexposed the photo by one stop, say, then the left cheek area would fall on Zone V, whereas his right ear would have fallen on Zone II.
BRONICA SQ A SAMPLE PHOTOS SKIN
Now, I used an incident meter for this, but if we convert to the Zone system, then the highlight in his skin would fall in, roughly, Zone VI. As you can see, the straight-from-the-lab scanned version looks pretty flat as well.Īnother thing about the portrait is that I vaguely remember there were 3 stops difference between the subject's left cheek area (the highlight) and his right ear (the shadow). These two are the ones I got from the lab, and my edited version, respectively, shot using a 65mm lens, and this time using my spotmeter.
One thing I realized is that some of the photos in this roll were with a different lens (the SQ system have in-lens leaf shutters). Indeed, I tweaked the photos' level curves last night and they look much better.
0 kommentar(er)
