- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 14,160
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Or to put it another way, if you can get a razor sharp negative with one of your 360mm's at any give time, why not crop to the equivalent FOV?
There's no issue with a 600 prime lens per se on a monorail. Just add more rail.
That is from "Castles in Spain". Old Style 1000mm Zeiss lens I think.
Truly interesting is the Norma front standard which was milled and machined to fit the front half of the monster 1000mm.
He's was a true Master of Photography
I think the first thing you have to ask yourself, is are you taking photos of anything that requires a long lens?
I do, generally much prefer longer lenses to shorter. On 35, I don’t shoot wider than 50 that often. I prefer my 85 and 105.
Ansel Adams used a 580 mm focal to shot "Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico" (1941), perhaps his most famous image, this would be 290mm equivalent in 4x5". Some people think that only short focals work well for landscaps, but YMMV.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonrise,_Hernandez,_New_Mexico
Some people think that only short focals work well for landscaps, but YMMV.
I could not agree more.I think the first thing you have to ask yourself, is are you taking photos of anything that requires a long lens? I find with 4x5 and up, the whole point of using larger negatives is to get more detail on wider angles. If you just need a tight shot, often times you can get by with some cropping on a normal lens
In my experience, broad vistas shot with lenses much shorter than normal come out all foreground. Landscapes in which the horizon is near, no more than 100 feet away, work better with lenses much shorter than normal.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?