|
|
Post by Peter S. on Oct 31, 2007 16:54:17 GMT -5
Dear fellow camera collectors, due to the bad weather on the trip shown in the previous post, I came back a few days later. Hoping for better weather. When leaving the teleferic at noon (I had to work in the morning ;-) ), the weather looked promising, er, with a certain room for further improvement.  A look back gave a nice view back to the teleferic.  I walked on, had lunch on a mountain inn. I followed the same tracks - now a bit more could be seen. Note the emphasis on "a bit".  I left the path at this place, because I felt, it would give me a good opportunity for a picture ...  and climed the small ridge You can see in the center. It was a bit helpful that I am not plagued by excessive vertigo... And hell, that instinct was right.  I set up my tripod (did carry about 10 kg of photo gear with me - but it was well worth the effort). Mounted the Tamron SP 3.5/17 (!!) on the XD-7, waited a bit for the clouds to give me a bit of view. This is maybe the best image I took this year. I am excited and happy about it. And I thought You may be pleased to see it, too. Best regards Peter |
|
|
|
Post by doubs43 on Oct 31, 2007 17:37:56 GMT -5
Peter, you live and work in scenic and beautiful country. I like the last image also. There's something mysterious about it. Is that a person I see in the lower middle, standing almost on the spine of the ridge? Or is that just an illusion?
Walker
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on Oct 31, 2007 18:12:34 GMT -5
Dear Walker, You look at my picture very closely! Yes, there are people, but it is a group of three. Btw, this is a nice way, to illustrate the exceptional performance of that lens (in terms of resolution) and the pretty large amount of chromatic aberation (which I found in a similar way for the Minolta MC). But have a look by yourself...  This is the crop from the spot of my image You are talking about. You can see the chromatic aberation on the white-red-white marking of the hiking path. Best regards Peter PS: I upsampled (interpolated) the crop by a factor of two and then sharpened it a bit. But I think it is fair to say, that we see the exceptional resolution of this 17mm lens. Btw, the best 50mm primes are even a (tiny) bit better. |
|
|
|
Post by John Parry on Oct 31, 2007 18:34:24 GMT -5
Lovely photographs Peter
Your athleticism puts me to shame!
Regards - John
|
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Oct 31, 2007 19:13:35 GMT -5
Peter
I have enjoyed your two postings today. I can get a real sense of what it might have been like to be there, minus all the effort that you had to put into getting there. I would not complain about having taken that flower photo in your first post if it had been me. What is the English translation of the flowers name? I am guessing Devils something. You made very good use of that ultra wide Tamron SP 17 and that is not the easiest thing to do.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by John Parry on Oct 31, 2007 20:34:12 GMT -5
Bob
Here in England that's a cornflower. They still manage to come up in our garden 30 years after the land changed from a field to a housing estate - one of our most beautiful flowers!
Regards - John
|
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Nov 1, 2007 5:46:39 GMT -5
Peter, that last photo is superb.
|
|
|
|
Post by doubs43 on Nov 1, 2007 15:37:54 GMT -5
Peter, the resolution of your lens is indeed impressive. The three hikers are clearly seen in your crop and the detail is excellent. Thank you for posting that.
Walker
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on Nov 6, 2007 9:32:46 GMT -5
Hi Walker,
this lens is no cheapo (I had to pay 150 € for it) - but it is a pretty good ulta wide. And You can
put it on all of the major cameras due to the Adaptall-2 exchangeable mount. The resolution
may be sufficient for a 50x75cm^2 (20x30") print - if properly processed (i.e. some sharpening
added). So I unhesitatingly can recommend this lens.
If a bit less coverage is sufficient, the 24mm Rokkor is even offering a bit more resolution - but
obviously You have to work carefully to push it to that limit (i.e. stopping down and using a tripod,
and of course You need very fine grain film - I used Velvia 100F).
But You get rewarded with great detail.
It seems I am a bit of a perfectionist...
Best regards
Peter
|
|
|
|
Post by Rachel on Nov 10, 2007 9:11:02 GMT -5
Peter that Tamron 17mm lens is excellent. I could never afford the price of one. Vivitar, I think, made a cheaper one although that may have been a 19mm lens. I have a Cosina 20mm in a Minolta MD fitting but I've not had a chance to use it yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter S. on Nov 10, 2007 11:46:32 GMT -5
Dear Rachel,
when one is willing to carry a tripod (for being able to step down to F/11 and spend the exposure time)
then the Tokina SL 3.5/17 is also doing the job. I once bought mine (which will leave me on Monday as a
birthday present for a good friend) for ca. 100 Swiss Francs (about 65 €). So it can be found for a reasonable
price.
The Minolta-heads I know are pretty picky with their lenses - even more with third party lenses. The Tokina
is discussed controversial - but it is discussed at all. They wouldn't do for Vivitar (except early Series 1) or
Cosina (what's that - huh).
The more I look at my picture, them more I think, the 24mm lens would have given me a not less impressive
picture. Or only a little less...
And this leads me to my mantra: every Minolta shooter should try to get hold of a MD (or MC) W.Rokkor 2.8/24.
This lens is most likely the best Minolta ever did (maybe the MC Rokkor-PG 1.2/58 comes close).
I wish You however a lot of fun with the 20mm WA. Crazy things can happen, when one of these is on the
camera... ;-) ... or better ;--o)
Best regards
Peter
PS: I hope somebody who ever took a facial portrait with one of these will understand
my ASCII art.
Best regards
Peter
|
|
