Posted by Tim Mulholland on November 17, 2006 at 8:08 PM
This is a follow-up to my recent image posting of Wisconsin "slot canyons." ;) This particular "glen" is called Durward's Glen and is about five miles east of Parfrey's Glen, which appeared the other day. This photo was taken a couple of weeks ago, using a Fuji G617, f/45, 2", polarizer, Velvia 100F...
Tim!
Illuminata Photo
TimMulholland.com
Posted by Josh Anderson on November 17, 2006 at 10:10 PM
Is this several images stitched together? And why the f/45?
Posted by Bernie Kasper on November 18, 2006 at 12:12 AM
Very nice Tim, this would probably be really neat with alot of water cascading thru here, Nice image
Posted by Tim Mulholland on November 18, 2006 at 12:08 PM
Josh,
This is from a Fuji G617 - the image size is about 60mm x 170mm - not stitched together. And, I frequently shoot at f/45 with this camera because the results appear sharper to me than if I shoot with a wider diaphragm...
Tim!
Posted by Dan Borzynski on November 20, 2006 at 1:05 PM
Josh, once you start shooting larger formats, smaller f-stops like f32 and f45 become fairly common to get anything resembling depth of field. In 4x5 (I am not sure about conversions for 617), 150mm lens is around 50 mm in 35 mm, but the DOF is the same as for a 150mm lens in 35mm. Soooo, if in 35 mm, you shoot a 50 lens at f16, in 4x5, you are looking at f32 to f45 for similar depth of field. You learn very quickly not to be afraid of f45. The wind, on the other hand...
Diffraction tends not to be as much of an issue for larger format cameras. The laws of physics don't change. What does change is how much of an enlargement you need to make. The greater the enlargement, the more diffraction is noticeable in the print. An 8"x24" print of a 617 image is only about a four-fold enlargement of the film. I have never seen diffraction to be an issue in a 35 mm 4x6 print; this is the same degree of increase.
Discussion
4 repliesTim!
Illuminata Photo
TimMulholland.com
This is from a Fuji G617 - the image size is about 60mm x 170mm - not stitched together. And, I frequently shoot at f/45 with this camera because the results appear sharper to me than if I shoot with a wider diaphragm...
Tim!
Diffraction tends not to be as much of an issue for larger format cameras. The laws of physics don't change. What does change is how much of an enlargement you need to make. The greater the enlargement, the more diffraction is noticeable in the print. An 8"x24" print of a 617 image is only about a four-fold enlargement of the film. I have never seen diffraction to be an issue in a 35 mm 4x6 print; this is the same degree of increase.