Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Still Life with Onions and Garlic
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Gallery MF
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 3:48 pm    Post subject: Still Life with Onions and Garlic Reply with quote
Canon 5dMkII and Carl Zeiss Planar 1.4/50 ZS (M42):



Last edited by Orio on Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:25 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It looks like a painting, the light is perfect ...
The Planar is my dream ... Smile


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice classic shoot with excellent framing! Congrats!


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Succulent Orio. Love that planar effect (3D)



patrickh


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks guys. Seems like I'm going to print it large, Monica wants this one hanged on the kitchen wall. Smile


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
+1 great for kitchen wall


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
oh, a very beautiful photo, will be great on the kitchen wall!
great colors, and the lens sure shows it's strength too

now, if you permit Orio, though I always like tights crops, but for some reason here I think I'd want it just a bit less tight


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kuuan wrote:
oh, a very beautiful photo, will be great on the kitchen wall!
great colors, and the lens sure shows it's strength too

now, if you permit Orio, though I always like tights crops, but for some reason here I think I'd want it just a bit less tight


Maybe I'll try a different framing, I plan to make another version using a different lighting.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pretty faithful rendition, would make a fine print indeed Very Happy

by the way i'll consider the ZE version very soon. Silly question Orio :does the ZS version worx with an adapter and you do stop down metering ? grazie


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
kuuan wrote:
oh, a very beautiful photo, will be great on the kitchen wall!
great colors, and the lens sure shows it's strength too

now, if you permit Orio, though I always like tights crops, but for some reason here I think I'd want it just a bit less tight


Maybe I'll try a different framing, I plan to make another version using a different lighting.


If you do, have a straight wall in the back. Preferably one that does not cut the motif with a horizontal line (ok if its straight I guess). But thats my opinion. Other than that. I like onions and garlic, and also the picture of them. Wink


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hexi wrote:
Pretty faithful rendition, would make a fine print indeed Very Happy

by the way i'll consider the ZE version very soon. Silly question Orio :does the ZS version worx with an adapter and you do stop down metering ? grazie


Yes, ZS works with an M42-EOS adapted, and, I do stop down meter.
The lens is equipped with a very handy manual/auto commuter. So you can stop down to desired aperture, the lens stays open while switch is on auto, focus the lens which stays wide open, then move the switch to photograph at the preset aperture, without moving the eye away from the viewfinder.
Of course, you must meter the light when the switch closes the actual iris.

I have chosen the ZS (M42) over the ZE because it has the manual iris. I like manual iris. Smile


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanx Orio, i'll consider this possibilty as well Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
hexi wrote:
Pretty faithful rendition, would make a fine print indeed Very Happy

by the way i'll consider the ZE version very soon. Silly question Orio :does the ZS version worx with an adapter and you do stop down metering ? grazie


Yes, ZS works with an M42-EOS adapted, and, I do stop down meter.
The lens is equipped with a very handy manual/auto commuter. So you can stop down to desired aperture, the lens stays open while switch is on auto, focus the lens which stays wide open, then move the switch to photograph at the preset aperture, without moving the eye away from the viewfinder.
Of course, you must meter the light when the switch closes the actual iris.

I have chosen the ZS (M42) over the ZE because it has the manual iris. I like manual iris. Smile


Why not get the classic Contax version then (much cheaper).
Do you have any evidence/hints that the newer incarnations of the Planar are better?
Or was it just the switch?


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:

Maybe I'll try a different framing,


Drop the shadow, see how it looks.

Edit: What lighting did you use?


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
great Orio! (just a little bit more room on top would be good IMHO)


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
nkanellopoulos wrote:

Why not get the classic Contax version then (much cheaper).


I have the classic Contax, but for some reason, most surely related to the adapter, when I use it with the 5D and 5DII, the iris does not close.
It only closes when I use it with the 50D.
So for this reason I bought the ZS - and also because I needed a fast 50mm lens for use with my film Bessie.
Besides, I was curious about the Z SRL lenses, I never tried any.

nkanellopoulos wrote:
Do you have any evidence/hints that the newer incarnations of the Planar are better?
Or was it just the switch?


No, no evidence. I love the Contax a lot and if it wasn't for the iris issue with the 5D, I probably would not have bought the ZS.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Himself wrote:
What lighting did you use?


Natural. I have great natural light in my living room. In the position of the furniture, the light arrives from two opposite directions, so the result is this flat balanced lighting, which is good to bring out nuances in colours.

In the weekend I will try to use softboxes and see what I can do with the subject, useing more directional light and trying to bring out the texture instead. Possibly also doing it with B&W medium format.

Besides, the image is hand-held and the ISO is 1600.
If I used a tripod and 100 ISO I would have probably gotten even better colour and a more organic feel (due to long exposure).


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Throw in some mushrooms.zucchini and butter and it would be perfect... Very Happy
Can I ask would a lower point of view make a difference as in looking across to the still life or is looking down better for the light?


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
mo wrote:
Throw in some mushrooms.zucchini and butter and it would be perfect... Very Happy
Can I ask would a lower point of view make a difference as in looking across to the still life or is looking down better for the light?


Good question. Well, lower view point when dealing with things placed over a flat surface (table or other), would cause what I call the frieze effect, that is, a nearly bi-dimensional space where the objects appear pasted over the background (like egyptian friezes).
If you take a look at the paintings of a master of still life, Paul Cézanne, you will notice that often he cheats with perspective, showing objects from a higher point of view than the one that their real position on the table would imply. And not just that, he plays a lot with the trick, showing different objects which lay over the same flat surface, as if they were seen from different view points and angles. For this reason, his paintings are reputed to have been the "seed" for the cubism to develop later. Cézanne however was not a cubist, and the reason he did what he did, was to give objects more dimensionality (or depth, or "3-D") than what the rather simple perspective of a table would give if treated realistically.
So, to put the blah-blah to an end, a higher-than-the-table point of view in a still life helps to define the impression of the objects in a dimensional space. Light is not directly related to that, but of course, light plays a decisive role in the shaping of the objects appearance.
WIth the kind of flat, modern-art lighting of my scene, a higher point of view surely helps a lot.
With a mannerist or baroque type of directional lighting (like Caravaggio, or Rembrandt), the light helps better in defining the depth of the objects, so you could probably also afford a lower point of view for your scene.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 24, 2010 11:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't mind the blah,blah...it teaches me Very Happy I can understand what you are saying,thanks for using the masters of painting to explain! I look forward to seeing what else you can come up with for showing off these garlic and onions.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:

If I used a tripod and 100 ISO I would have probably gotten even better colour and a more organic feel (due to long exposure).


Hello Orio,
Do you mean the lower ISO or slower shutter? I always feel a need for a slower shutter as being important if I can manage one without motion blur becoming an issue, Im told by others slower shutter will make no difference.

I may be mistaken but i feel the longer sample for the sensor produces a better IQ? Seems you might be suggesting the same?


PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bruce wrote:
Orio wrote:

If I used a tripod and 100 ISO I would have probably gotten even better colour and a more organic feel (due to long exposure).

Hello Orio,
Do you mean the lower ISO or slower shutter? I always feel a need for a slower shutter as being important if I can manage one without motion blur becoming an issue, Im told by others slower shutter will make no difference.
I may be mistaken but i feel the longer sample for the sensor produces a better IQ? Seems you might be suggesting the same?


hi Bruce
I mean both. Necessarily, if I use a 100 ISO in a room where I would obtain a shutter speed of 1/50 sec.with 1600 ISO, this means I would need to use a shutter speed of 1/4 sec. - and necessarily a tripod.
The low ISO would mean better colours, obviously, and the slower shutter speed would result in a picture that has a more "organic" feel. Why? Well, if I used film, a major factor would be the light "bleed" over the emulsion which contributes a minimal edge blur effect. With digital, this does not happen. But there would still be micro movements of the camera. And finally there would be the air and light movement... yeah, I know this sounds absurd, but... do a test, use a DSLR with video function, and first, shoot a photo of a still life scene, then, shoot a movie of the same scene, about 30 seconds; then take the files and assemble them in a final movie: first put the 30 second of video footage; then, put the still photo, and let it last also 30 seconds.
When you play this composite movie back, you will feel that while the first 30 seconds feel alive, the last 30 seconds will feel dead, because there is no air movement, and no light movement, it's 30 seconds of a repeated frozen fast grab of a hundredth or so of second.
When you take a still photo, whose shutter time is long enough to record some of that movement, even if stratified onto a single still image, that image will feel more "organic" than a 1/125 sec. frozen grab.

-


PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks, I’ve always wanted to ask you this last question Very Happy and surprisingly I have done this video and still combination earlier in my video days. What do you think of the 50 iso on the 5dmkII? [with spot metering] I spent most this spring in the famous Back Bay area of Boston shooting many of the garden entries and the much loved buildings in this area. [Again nearly similar to the “still life.”] I found myself using 50 iso more and more as I was attaining extremely accurate color and interesting intensities between light and shade. At one point I was even using compensation to underexpose the 50 iso to gain a faster shutter and raising the light values in post [when needed] which were extremely noiseless in their final result. I was much impressed in many of my IQ’s. Raising light values in post I know is not your type of shooting Twisted Evil but what is your opinion on the 5D2's 50 iso? Is it usable for you?


PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bruce wrote:
what is your opinion on the 5D2's 50 iso? Is it usable for you?


Yes. It is however a camera processed version of a 100 ISO capture.
So better to use native 100 ISO whenever possible.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bruce wrote:
what is your opinion on the 5D2's 50 iso? Is it usable for you?


Yes. It is however a camera processed (interpolated) version of a 100 ISO capture.
So better to use native 100 ISO whenever possible.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Gallery MF
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2