Digital BW, The Print

Clayton, a while back you discussed your use of the Canon Pro-1 in B&W
photography. As I recall you weren't happy with rendition of skin tones...

Have you taken this further, gotten better results, or moved along to
another digicam? My reason for asking: I notice Pro-1 bargains, though
I'm tempted by soon-discontinued Leica D2 bargains, despite the lower
resolution...

Djon

Hello Djon,

>Clayton, a while back you discussed your use of the Canon Pro-1 
>in B&W photography. As I recall you weren't happy with rendition 
>of skin tones...
> 
>Have you taken this further, gotten better results, or moved along 
>to another digicam? My reason for asking: I notice Pro-1 bargains, 
>though I'm tempted by soon-discontinued Leica D2 bargains, despite 
>the lower resolution...

One of the Pro-1's strongest features is its lens - it is incredibly
sharp (it is the only L-class lens Canon has put on a fixed lens
camera).  I am continually impressed with it.  But it's also my
biggest complaint as a portrait lens - it's totally unforgiving.  You
can literally count the hairs on a mole.  I've resorted to using
slight gaussian blur to tame it.  It also tends to give a flat look to
skin tones, so I have to be more aware of getting some modelling from
the light.  I did a couple of portraits with rather flat light and was
not real happy with the results.  I managed to get something usable
but it wasn't great.  But I'm finding that with some light modeling it
does a much better job.  I've done some very nice portraits with it as
well, but I have to be concious of what I'm doing - not a bad thing I
guess <g>.

The biggest disadvantage of a fixed lens camera - you're stuck with
that lens.  In my 35mm and 6x7 work I had favorite portrait lenses.  I
had a Tamron zoom on a Minolta 7000i once that, for whatever reason,
was a superb portrait lens, but was just so-so as a landscape lens. 
And it's not just sharpness.  There are other qualities that can be
designed into a lens.

For landscape work I love the Pro-1.  It's incredible sharpness and
extreme DOF make it great for that.  You can shoot at wider apertures
at higher shutter speeds and have fewer problems with windblown flora
movement and still have full DOF.  I tend toward small prints - even
in the film/darkroom days my biggest prints were 11x14.  The Pro-1 at
8mp can deliver excellent 11x14s so I'm very pleased with it.  I took
it to Death Valley Nat'l Park in January and returned with a bunch of
very fine images, and it was a joy to use.  I'm totally spoiled by the
twisty view screen.  I use it like a miniature view camera.

Steve Karafyllakis got one and he recently showed me two nearly
identical 11x14 prints of a flower, one from the Pro-1 and the other
from 4x5 (can't remember what film).  They each had pros and cons, and
the Pro-1 version was equally good.  In some ways I liked it better
(maybe Steve will add something here...).


>though I'm tempted by soon-discontinued Leica D2 bargains, despite 
>the lower resolution...

I did a lot of research before buying this, including downloading and
printing dpreview sample images of various cams.  I concluded that 6mp
was not quite enough to allow some cropping and still give excellent
11x14s.  IMO, 8mp is the minimum for a good fine art landscape
digicam.  The D2 is less noisy and from what I've read seems like a
much better street machine.  If you like careful tripod work I highly
recommend the Pro-1 (it's not a good sports/action rig, and focuses
slowly in low light).  

Rumor has it that Canon & the others won't be upgrading these
pro-sumers because the latest technology improvements and lower cost
DSLRs are rendering these pro-sumer bridge cams obsolete.  If that's
true, the Pro-1 will remain a one-time wonder box and probably will be
in high demand once people realize there won't be a replacement.  In
the forums it's approaching worship status among those who like it,
very much like the G3, which has reached cult status and is getting
harder to find and bring high prices.  If you think it will fit into
your style of work I'd snap up one while they're cheap.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Clayton, thanks for the detailed insights. I've come to the conclusion
that 20D et al are halfway steps, too expensive for 8mp...I think
they'll become much cheaper soon... and I really dislike the SLR form
factor. The digicam concept makes more sense to me (Pro-1 & Leica D2),
especially since I rarely consider extreme lenses. Therefore I'll
probably shop for a good price on Pro-1...

Portrait suggestion: Hassleblad Softar.

Djon


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones"
<cj@c...> wrote:

> Hello Djon,
> 
> >Clayton, a while back you discussed your use of the Canon Pro-1 
> >in B&W photography. As I recall you weren't happy with rendition 
> >of skin tones...
> > 
> >Have you taken this further, gotten better results, or moved along 
> >to another digicam? My reason for asking: I notice Pro-1 bargains, 
> >though I'm tempted by soon-discontinued Leica D2 bargains, despite 
> >the lower resolution...
> 
> One of the Pro-1's strongest features is its lens - it is incredibly
> sharp (it is the only L-class lens Canon has put on a fixed lens
> camera).  I am continually impressed with it.  But it's also my
> biggest complaint as a portrait lens - it's totally unforgiving.  You
> can literally count the hairs on a mole.  I've resorted to using
> slight gaussian blur to tame it.  It also tends to give a flat look to
> skin tones, so I have to be more aware of getting some modelling from
> the light.  I did a couple of portraits with rather flat light and was
> not real happy with the results.  I managed to get something usable
> but it wasn't great.  But I'm finding that with some light modeling it
> does a much better job.  I've done some very nice portraits with it as
> well, but I have to be concious of what I'm doing - not a bad thing I
> guess <g>.
> 
> The biggest disadvantage of a fixed lens camera - you're stuck with
> that lens.  In my 35mm and 6x7 work I had favorite portrait lenses.  I
> had a Tamron zoom on a Minolta 7000i once that, for whatever reason,
> was a superb portrait lens, but was just so-so as a landscape lens. 
> And it's not just sharpness.  There are other qualities that can be
> designed into a lens.
> 
> For landscape work I love the Pro-1.  It's incredible sharpness and
> extreme DOF make it great for that.  You can shoot at wider apertures
> at higher shutter speeds and have fewer problems with windblown flora
> movement and still have full DOF.  I tend toward small prints - even
> in the film/darkroom days my biggest prints were 11x14.  The Pro-1 at
> 8mp can deliver excellent 11x14s so I'm very pleased with it.  I took
> it to Death Valley Nat'l Park in January and returned with a bunch of
> very fine images, and it was a joy to use.  I'm totally spoiled by the
> twisty view screen.  I use it like a miniature view camera.
> 
> Steve Karafyllakis got one and he recently showed me two nearly
> identical 11x14 prints of a flower, one from the Pro-1 and the other
> from 4x5 (can't remember what film).  They each had pros and cons, and
> the Pro-1 version was equally good.  In some ways I liked it better
> (maybe Steve will add something here...).
> 
> 
> >though I'm tempted by soon-discontinued Leica D2 bargains, despite 
> >the lower resolution...
> 
> I did a lot of research before buying this, including downloading and
> printing dpreview sample images of various cams.  I concluded that 6mp
> was not quite enough to allow some cropping and still give excellent
> 11x14s.  IMO, 8mp is the minimum for a good fine art landscape
> digicam.  The D2 is less noisy and from what I've read seems like a
> much better street machine.  If you like careful tripod work I highly
> recommend the Pro-1 (it's not a good sports/action rig, and focuses
> slowly in low light).  
> 
> Rumor has it that Canon & the others won't be upgrading these
> pro-sumers because the latest technology improvements and lower cost
> DSLRs are rendering these pro-sumer bridge cams obsolete.  If that's
> true, the Pro-1 will remain a one-time wonder box and probably will be
> in high demand once people realize there won't be a replacement.  In
> the forums it's approaching worship status among those who like it,
> very much like the G3, which has reached cult status and is getting
> harder to find and bring high prices.  If you think it will fit into
> your style of work I'd snap up one while they're cheap.
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Djon,

>Clayton, thanks for the detailed insights. I've come to the
>conclusion that 20D et al are halfway steps, too expensive for 
>8mp...I think they'll become much cheaper soon... 

Yes, and I think 8mp will gradually replace 6mp as the "base line"
resolution for entry level cams, with 12mp becoming the next level up.
 Nikon just released a 12mp cam for $5K and rumor has it that Canon
will have a 12mp answer in August at a lower price.


>and I really dislike the SLR form factor. 

Agreed.  I never really liked the 35mm 2:3 ratio - way too long.  But
in my 6x7 work the 4:5 ratio was great for portraits but often seemed
too "fat" for horizontal landscapes.  I was pleasantly surprised to
find the 3:4 ratio in the digicams and have really fallen in love with
it.  Seem just right and can easily go in either direction

Also, the digicam's light weight is important.  I have some back and
hip problems that were making it harder for me to schlep heavy stuff
around.  My camera bag went from 15lbs to 3.5lbs, and tripod went from
11 lbs to 4lbs (carbon fiber).  From 26 to 7.5 lbs.  I carried it
around all day on the DVNP dunes and never was hurting at all.  It's a
whole new world.  

Here's a pic (taken with the Casio) of the Pro-1 on the carbon fiber
tripod out on the dunes.  It has a light weight folding hood attached
to the open LCD screen - works great:

  http://www.cjcom.net/img/dvnp/pro-1-a.jpg

The twisty screen with hood allows careful composing out in bright
sunlight without having to bend over and squint into the viewfinder. 
It's great.

Here is one of the shots I came back with:

  http://www.cjcom.net/img/dvnp/pro-1-dune.jpg 

I'm working on a portfolio of dune pics, and they are working very
nicely with BO on Condor or Kayenta paper.  They look better on the
cold white papers.  I tried some with UT7 and found the improvement in
smoothness wasn't enough to overcome the loss of BO's luminance and
"pop", so it will be BO for these.


>The digicam concept makes more sense to me (Pro-1 & Leica D2), 

What many film users (and DSLR users) don't realize is how far the
small sensor cams have come in just the past year.  I have a 5mp Casio
the size of a deck of cards with a very sharp pentax lens on it that
takes astonishingly sharp pics that for 8x10 prints rivals the Pro-1.
 Fuji just released a tiny 6mp F10 with the latest incarnation of
their Super-CCD with useful ISO up to 1600.  Canon & others now have
tiny 7mp cams that do amazingly well.  It really is a whole new world
and it just keeps getting better.  


>especially since I rarely consider extreme lenses. 

Then you'll probably find the Pro-1's 28-200 range to be everything
you need.  It also has a super macro feature.


>Therefore I'll probably shop for a >good price on Pro-1...

After you find one check to see if it has the firmware upgrade.  You
can go to the Canon web site and find out how to test for it.  It's an
easy download and install process, and definitely worth it.  It
improves the low light focusing speed and the response of the zoom
ring, and other things.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm