Questions about digital

[TeriAnn]

I'm afraid I need to face realities of growing older (better than the alternative). My eye sight is becoming poor enough that I can no longer reliably get a critical focus on my subject. I have avoided auto focus camera gear so I could choose exactly where I want my focus plane to be.

For reference Here is the highlights of my two camera systems:

My small system is a Pentax 67, 2 bodies, and lenses going from 45mm through 300 mm and yes a Pentax focus screen magnifier.

My other system is a Wisner 4X5 technical field camera with 3 lenses.

I have a Jobo ATL-1000 portable film processor so can process my film during a trip anyplace I can find 110V, water and a dust free place to hang film to dry.

I like to make large prints and have always considered 35mm to be too small to print larger than 5X7. It has seemed a bit fuzzy at 8X10 and very fuzzy larger than that. 16X20 is about as large as I'm willing to print 6X7 film. I can't see the grain difference like I used to but I know others with critical eye sight can.

If I need to go to auto focus, maybe I should also consider digital as well. I've seen some large digital prints that look quite good to my current eyesight, but I wonder if digital can meet expectations. A significant percent of the shooting I do is at low light where the film is in reciprocity failure. My reciprocity tables and second timer are important tools.

Here is my main concern:

Can you get film like results using digital cameras in low light situations? Shooting at dusk? Slot canyons? Shooting at night by the light of a full moon?

Can I take pictures like these with a digital camera? If yes what features do I need?

Lake Mono at about 2AM under a full moon

South tuffas under a full moon with foreground flash fill

Monument Valley at the break of dawn

A slot canyon in Arizona.


​

What about filters? Do they work with digital? What if I wanted to use a slight warming filter to pop a sunset?

It will be very hard for me to sell my existing camera gear. I've been hanging onto it because of the faithful service my gear has given me, the places I've used it and the memories. But I need to face my current realties. I'm not sure what to replace my faithful gear with.

 

[Andrew Walcker]

I have absolutely no advice for you. I just wanted to say that your pictures are INCREDIBLE! Whatever you are doing, I'd hesitate to change it up.

 

[bajasurf]

Pentax Rigid Magnifying Hood

Hello TerriAnn, I also have a Pentax 6x7 and have you checked out the Pentax Rigid Magnifying Hood Model 6711? I am sure you have but just wanted to check. Good Luck

 

[bajasurf]

Pentax

Hello TeriAnn, I need glasses myself as I completely missed that you have a Pentax magnifier. Since you own Pentax 67 lens from 45mm to 300mm it is very easy for you to use those lens on any Pentax DSLR. All that is required is an adapter that can be bought from Pentax. I do not own a Pentax DSLR but have been thinking I may go that way to be able to use my 6x7 lens. Why not? If I could lug my 6x7( named Arnold for the Gov. of Calif) in a back pack with lens and tripod a wimpy DSLR would be a cake walk. Good Luck!!!

 

[Robthebrit]

Here is my main concern:

Can you get film like results using digital cameras in low light situations? Shooting at dusk? Slot canyons? Shooting at night by the light of a full moon?


What about filters? Do they work with digital? What if I wanted to use a slight warming filter to pop a sunset?

You can get film like results from digital but digital is different. Just like slide is different to normal film, digital is different again but in the big picture more like slide film. Digital has another factor in the camera, different cameras and especially different makes will respond very differently. In hard conditions digital can be very unforgiving but a lot of the problems can be mitigated by knowing your camera. I always shoot raw and my 5D is permanently set to under expose by 1/3, sometimes I'll drop it to -2/3. I have had a lot more success in off-line processing brightening them and recovering the shadows than I have the other way around. You really just have to figure out what works for you.

Filters work pretty much exactly like they do on film but using them seems to be a dying art. Most things you of have used a filter for in the past can be done afterwards in photoshop or lightroom but there are somethings which you cannot fix. For example images that are shadowed but also contain a bright sky will often exceed the dynamic range of the sensor, you'll have to pick dark or bright and do the best you can when processing it but yo won't be able to fix it. Using a gradient filter, as you would on film, you can darken the and pull the final image into a range the sensor can handle. Filters and post processing are just tools to manipulate the image, there is a lot of overlap in what they do but there is also a lot one can do that the other cannot.

Wandering off topic a little: One final option you have with digital is HDR imaging. These are images that are can pretty much handle any value so represent the darked shadows and the brightest sky. Afterwards you can process sections of the image differently to pull out the bright and dark detail as you wish, you can easily fix the above problem which requires a gradient filter. As the photographer you take a series of images adjusting the exposure on each, then put them through a tool which combines them into HDR. There is a long to go before its main stream (if ever) and because barely any commercial applications support HDR, in particular photoshop. File size is a problem, they make raw files look small, they are typically 12 bytes per pixel so a 10M pixel camera will make a 120M byte uncompressed image. We have used HDR in movies and games for years but Photoshop is not involved to screw things up.

Rob

 

[Overdrive]

TeriAnn, I just read a Popular Photography article on the new Canon EOS 40D, a 10.1 megapixel DSLR. (I'm just now studying the features of DSLR's, as I don't own one yet, so I'm reading up on them.)

They say it "has a manual focus feature where you can maneuver a zone box over any part of the image, then zoom in to 5X or 10X magnification to fine-tune focus." And, "There are also three user-interchangeable focusing screens available for the 40D--rare in this class."

Further in the magazine, a report on the Olympus E3 mentions the same 10X magnification "focus assist".

Maybe this sort of feature will be the assist you need?

Scott

 

[DaveInDenver]

Most things you of have used a filter for in the past can be done afterwards in photoshop or lightroom but there are somethings which you cannot fix.

A polarizer is difficult to duplicate in Photoshop. Some effects of it, like darkening the sky, could probably be done, but eliminating reflections would be pretty much impossible.

 

[cowboy4x4]

When I switched from film to digital I sold my film cameras, my advice to you would be dont waste your time selling just keep it for (whatever) you wont get any kind of money for your film stuff . I wish now that I did not sell my film cameras,not that I would ever use them again I LOVE digital ,I could have set them up as display on a shelf or something JMO

 

[Photog]

TeriAnn,
I've seen the work you have posted in this forum, and it is very nice.

Your initial comments sound like you have a need for auto focus. Many of us are in that same boat. If it were not for good auto focus, I would not be able to meet my clients needs. Some of the digital cameras will let you use manual focus lenses, and will indicate when it is in focus. Others need their own auto focus lenses. At the professional level, the camera can keep track of a few different lenses, and be calibrated perfectly for proper focus (Something most folks never thought could be a problem).

The quality you need in the image depends on the end usage.
1) If it is for magazine spreads, 6MPix would be just fine.
2) If your photos will be on billboards, 8 MPix will do the job. Billboards are not viewed close up.
3) Portraits up to 20X30 10 MPix and up.
4) 20X30 with multiple people (family group portraits) 12 MPix and up.

There are meduim format digital cameras; but they have high price tags, and are geared to commercial photographers, working in a studio with plug in power and computer.

The sharpness of the final image has a lot to do with the quality of the pixels in the sensor. An 8Mpix P&S will never produce the same quality of image as an 8Mpix pro camera. Photgraph quality also has to do with the software that takes the image and prepares it for the printer. This software is called RIP software. It is used after Photoshop enhancements.

Using a good RIP software, I used a 4Mpix camera (Canon G3) to do a portrait session, and created images that won awards in PPA competition. These were printed at 16X20, and appear very sharp and not masked.

The digital sensor acts much like slide film. Narrow dynamic range (5 stops or less), and the light areas are ruined before the dark areas. Print film is opposite of this. By using the RAW file format recommended above, you can achieve 7-12 stops of dynamic range. Split graduated filters and polarizers are all that is necessary to have with you. Sunset warming, etc., is easily adjusted in Photoshop. Even some of the white balance settings will add a little warmth to a sunset.

Many of the digital cameras have noise reduction to allow for long exposures. Some use a process called "Dark Slide" masking. The camera takes a second inage, with the same time-laps as the first, but keeps the shutter closed. Any digital noise that is recorded on the Dark Slide, is subtracted from the first image. Thus your long exposures take twice as long, and twice as much battery life. Unlike a film camera, as long as the shutter is open, the battery is being drained. Battery life is usually your limiting factor for long exposures.

You are already used to being your own lab, so converting to digital won't be such a shock for you. You understand that post processing can be used to enhance an image, and you know you are not done, when you press the shutter release. Like your developing process, you may be tied to a 110v outlet, for your post processing.

All of this from a 35mm sized Digital SLR camera.!

The camera in mys hands in the Avitar, is a Canon 1D Mk II. It is one durable camera. Nikon makes equivalent gear.

Sorry for being so long-winded.

 

[bigreen505]

First off, I think Brian summed it up pretty well.

I'm afraid I need to face realities of growing older (better than the alternative). My eye sight is becoming poor enough that I can no longer reliably get a critical focus on my subject.

Sounds to me like it is time to invest in some high quality, aftermarket focusing screens.

I like to make large prints and have always considered 35mm to be too small to print larger than 5X7.

I think that is a bit silly, especially looking at DSLRs, but a lot of the quality of the final image comes down to your digital darkroom abilities.

If I need to go to auto focus, maybe I should also consider digital as well.

For what it is worth, my eye sight is bad enough that I can't even find the chart, let alone read it, but I sold off all my Canon gear and switched to Leica digital because as good as AF was, it never seemed to focus on what I want. So now I shoot with a camera system that was designed from the ground up for manual focus. Manually focusing an autofocus camera system is extremely difficult.

I've seen some large digital prints that look quite good to my current eyesight, but I wonder if digital can meet expectations. A significant percent of the shooting I do is at low light where the film is in reciprocity failure. My reciprocity tables and second timer are important tools.

Honestly, I would stick with film. Time for a quick lesson. You have been at it long enough to be familiar with the inverse square law. Well, it applies to digital too. Digital captures the most information in a scene that is pure white. The information captured drops as an inverse square with each stop to the point of zero in complete black. A lot of the detail that you may be getting with carefully developed 4x5 may not be there in digital.

Can you get film like results using digital cameras in low light situations? Shooting at dusk? Slot canyons? Shooting at night by the light of a full moon?

Yes, but it will look different and you will have to do it completely differently. You will want to shoot, as much as practical, with exposures just long enough so you don't blow important highlights, than make it look like night in photoshop.

What about filters? Do they work with digital? What if I wanted to use a slight warming filter to pop a sunset?

I will say that it is a qualified yes. They will work, but you will be learning to use them all over again because the results you get may be very different than how they worked on film. Besides a polarizer and possibly ND grads, you may be better creating the effect in photoshop.

Terri, my advice to people in your situation is always the same. Pick up a decent DSLR and either zoom lenses or in your case a Pentax K1D so you can use your current lenses, and keep the 4x5. If you want to match 4x5 quality with digital bring cash.

 

[Photog]

TeriAnn,
Have you come to any conclusions on this point?

Do you think you can apply your Zen Photography skills to a camera the size of a 35mm film camera?