At 4/23/2020 09:50 PM, Mike and Moose wrote:
>On 4/23/2020 4:28 PM, Mike Gordon via olympus wrote:
>
>><<<Finally, the cover shot for my book "Mount Desert Island and Acadia
>>National Park"
>><http://galleries.moosemystic.net/MooseFoto/index.php?gallery=Travel/NorthEast_2009/MtDesert/Misc&image=_MG_7928n.jpg>
>>
>>I remember and love that shot. Well done.
>
>Thanks!
Yes, that is a great shot. And typical of WA shots, horizon is center. One of
the constraints of the UW? I remember testing that idea, how to use the UW with
Horizon non-centered. Here was one experiment (not great shots, just out in
back of my house) with the 12mm/5.6 version of your 10mm CV.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/oAvsfFGyTY1Pdatq8 - CV 12mm/5.6
What I decided is that what matters is what is of interest in the foreground
and how stretched the corners can be without being a problem. You can see in
these shots, the vertical objects like to be in the center. The non-centered
horizon has a disorienting feeling to it. But is a great way to get in the sky.
The new sonie 20mm is a good compromise for me and ease of use. It has good
close focus ability. My favorite thing on Brown's Ranch is this dead cactus.
The interesting thing is that I am very close in the last shot, (inches) yet it
does not feel that way:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/xV1gBA9owCoibXXY6
Some more 20mm and 2 with 90mm. It was partly raining that day, so the desert
look moist. The 20mm close up perspective is another WA use. I normally thought
of WA as landscape scene, so close up is a discovery for me. Thinking about
lenses versus using them are two different things. I did not have the 12 on me
that day. I just grab the cameras and headed out to catch the interesting
weather:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/6QK6EAJMfJJXfn3h7
I'm liking this 20mm, especially compared to 24mm focal length.
>For subjects that look good cropped to a narrow horizontal band across the
>center, they are fabulous.
>
>>
>> <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Lenses/Heliar%2010-56/HWAoV.htm>
>>
>>I fully realize this is just an AOV illustration but one can see how it takes
>>compositional skill to use these UW's well. Anything close on the sides gets
>>"the stretches" from volume anamorphosis --most of the time I don't like that
>>look.
>
>Yup, that's a good reason to go with pana crops. All the old, film based ultra
>wide cameras did that for practical film and mechanics reasons, but it also
>hid most of those problems. There is also width stretching at the horizontal
>edges, but it's not as noticeable.
>
>The point may be that it depends on the subject - AND - one gets to choose the
>crop. With sky corners and dark and/or nondescript subject in bottom corners,
>and it won't be seen, for example.
>
>There is also the hope that I can spend much less time in the digital
>darkroom, un-fishing.
One thought on the way you illustrated the UW, which is good and point taken.
Howerver, it makes the narrower views less appealing, maybe if they were all
displayed at the same screen size, they might not feel quite as constrained.
I have been thinking how the 10mm example is closer to what our eye would see,
minus the corner stretching. A "normal" lens (50mm) is only normal if we crop
the view our eyes see.
I also noticed, going through many of you photos, they are often either on the
wide end, or the tele end ==> UW range Moose.
Not so wide range - WayneS
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
