sf
Veteran
I would be interested to see how many of us are RF645 users, and to see how we all use the greatest rangefinder ever made.
hitmanh
dum de dum de doo
As soon as my scanner arrives later this week, I should be able to put something up
Matt
Matt
BronicaLee
Established
count me in as one card carrying rf-er
sf
Veteran
Anyone? Here are three shots, one from each of the 45, 65, and 100.
45mm: the lens is so incredibly sharp, that on an 11x14 print, the faces of people in the distance can be clearly seen with a loupe. I also love the perspective effect that the wide angle allows. Having a lens with near zero distortion and such incredible resolution makes the 45mm one of my 3 favorite lenses. Right behind the 100, and right before the 65.
65mm: no particular reason, except that the 65mm has very nice resolution and micro contrast that allows a shot like this to work. I've worked with lenses in the past that would have trouble recording the figures on the hill as sharp for lack of macro and micro contrast quality.
100mm: chosen because I just like that picture, and the 100mm really produces beautifully tonal images and the OOF is really pleasant.
THis is horrible gear appreciation, but I got bored.
45mm: the lens is so incredibly sharp, that on an 11x14 print, the faces of people in the distance can be clearly seen with a loupe. I also love the perspective effect that the wide angle allows. Having a lens with near zero distortion and such incredible resolution makes the 45mm one of my 3 favorite lenses. Right behind the 100, and right before the 65.
65mm: no particular reason, except that the 65mm has very nice resolution and micro contrast that allows a shot like this to work. I've worked with lenses in the past that would have trouble recording the figures on the hill as sharp for lack of macro and micro contrast quality.
100mm: chosen because I just like that picture, and the 100mm really produces beautifully tonal images and the OOF is really pleasant.
THis is horrible gear appreciation, but I got bored.
Attachments
MichaelHarris
Well-known
nice pictures. Man I want that 45mm lens bad.
IGMeanwell
Well-known
I wouldn't mind seeing more results from that 100mm ... looks like its a nice portrait lens
sf
Veteran
IGMeanwell said:
for the 100mm, I have attached 3 examples of its beauty. The vignetting on the third frame is artificial. I tried to remove it in PS, but was unable to clean it away completely.
This is really quite nauseating I am sure, for anyone NOT under its spell...
But please don't keep me the only person posting to this thread.
Attachments
Last edited:
IGMeanwell
Well-known
shutterflower said:
I'd be right with ya if I owned the camera
I like its look.... I have never honestly considered this camera
mostly because it can be expensive and the majority of my money seems to be going to Nikon lately.
So out of the bunch what is your favorite lens? Don't chicken out and say all three
sf
Veteran
IGMeanwell said:I'd be right with ya if I owned the camera
I like its look.... I have never honestly considered this camera
mostly because it can be expensive and the majority of my money seems to be going to Nikon lately.
So out of the bunch what is your favorite lens? Don't chicken out and say all three
my favorite...well, there are many very nice wides in the world, and many nice normal lenses...but very few in the league of the 100mm. It is something special. It is my favorite.
jtm
not a moose
George, I'll keep you from being the only poster, but I don't have any RF645 pictures on my computer. Sadly, not being able to scan 120 film keeps me from using that camera much, which is a real shame. I might need to find it a better home.
jtm
not a moose
I found one after all. Not remarkable. 65mm lens.
All three lenses are amazing, especially for their price. The 45 is amazing for its price, size, and grace.
sf
Veteran
jtm said:
that's a very nice picture. The DOF and bokeh is actually quite pleasing. I haven't used the 65mm all that much.
jtm
not a moose
shutterflower said:
Once you have the other two lenses, it's easy to ignore the 65. You've mentioned that it has great resolution and clarity, so you can make pictures like your kite flyer example. But it's also impressive in the way it blurs busy backgrounds in a really gentle way. It's even good with troublesome things like sky through leaves.
Warren69
Newbie
The lady's hats picture is with the 65mm, and the red bench picture with the 45mm. I've had the RF645 for about three years; purchased as a travel MF camera. I recently acquired the 45mm lens. With the 65mm lens, because I like to use 100 slide film, I was constantly battling the compromise between DOF and shutter speed. With the increased DOF from the 45mm lens, that problem has been reduced.
An unanticipated benefit of having the external viewfinder mounted, is with the 65mm lens mounted, I can evaluated the scene with two different sets of frame lines. That helps me choose which lens to use.
When not using the RF645, I use a tripod mounted Hasselblad. Using a loupe, I see no difference between the images. I use the Hasselblad mostly for flower macros and night photography.
I'm going on a Mediterranean cruise in the fall and plan on taking the RF645 with the two lenses. I think that will be a good travel package. Jerry.
An unanticipated benefit of having the external viewfinder mounted, is with the 65mm lens mounted, I can evaluated the scene with two different sets of frame lines. That helps me choose which lens to use.
When not using the RF645, I use a tripod mounted Hasselblad. Using a loupe, I see no difference between the images. I use the Hasselblad mostly for flower macros and night photography.
I'm going on a Mediterranean cruise in the fall and plan on taking the RF645 with the two lenses. I think that will be a good travel package. Jerry.
Attachments
Turtle
Veteran
I love this camera and only have the 45 and 65 both of which are as good as it gets. Here are some favourite shots from the 45 (interior) and 65 (fog scene):
It is such a shame the camera was released with the 135 compatability issues as it killed it. Such fast intuitive handling....
It is such a shame the camera was released with the 135 compatability issues as it killed it. Such fast intuitive handling....
Laurence
Established
Turtle, the interior image with the 45 is absolutely a thrilling piece of work with tonality and sharpness (at least from what I'm seeing with a computer monitor).
Turtle
Veteran
Laurence said:
Thanks.....and relative lack of flare! In the negs altho there is some halation around the lead window glass frames in the door, this is hardly surprising cosidering the enormous brightness range and need to expose for shadows. However in all cases the lead frames are clearly visible.
I enjoyed working with the RF645 so much when I shot these because I did not have to think about anything other than DOF and exposure (and that was fairly simple). Getting the camera set up was so easy. I was able to move very quickly and get the compositions I wanted without really registering that I had a camera in my hands. I just had to set up the tripod head exactly where I had settled and take the frame. The fog scene was shot hand held. I shot a fair few frames with the 65mm inside the same house but my scanner broke before I could scan the remainder.
mdelevie
Established
my three favorites
my three favorites
It's a versatile camera. It travels well, it's inconspicuous, and it's very easy and quick to use. This is the camera that got me to put down digital SLRs.
The sunset was shot with the 45mm at around f/16 on Velvia 50 in the Shenandoah National Park, the only tripod shot of the three.
The dog snapshot was with the 65mm lens onto Delta 100, without composing through the viewfinder -- I just guessed the distance, held the camera down at dog level, then snapped the shutter. Program mode, so I have no idea what exposure, but looking at the DOF it sure looks like a small aperture. Fill flash was RF20 set 1 stop below exposure level.
The wedding shot was with the 100mm lens wide open (f/4.5) onto Portra 400 UltraColor, don't recall the exposure details. I barely got the entire image I wanted -- was still learning the lens, and hadn't discovered that the framelines don't zoom but the lens does somewhat when focusing close. Taking this shot again tomorrow, I'd back up a step. Fill flash was same as above.
Haven't used the 135 much, don't have a favorite shot yet. Found it on oBoy over the summer, paid too much, but whaddya gonna do?
my three favorites
It's a versatile camera. It travels well, it's inconspicuous, and it's very easy and quick to use. This is the camera that got me to put down digital SLRs.
The sunset was shot with the 45mm at around f/16 on Velvia 50 in the Shenandoah National Park, the only tripod shot of the three.
The dog snapshot was with the 65mm lens onto Delta 100, without composing through the viewfinder -- I just guessed the distance, held the camera down at dog level, then snapped the shutter. Program mode, so I have no idea what exposure, but looking at the DOF it sure looks like a small aperture. Fill flash was RF20 set 1 stop below exposure level.
The wedding shot was with the 100mm lens wide open (f/4.5) onto Portra 400 UltraColor, don't recall the exposure details. I barely got the entire image I wanted -- was still learning the lens, and hadn't discovered that the framelines don't zoom but the lens does somewhat when focusing close. Taking this shot again tomorrow, I'd back up a step. Fill flash was same as above.
Haven't used the 135 much, don't have a favorite shot yet. Found it on oBoy over the summer, paid too much, but whaddya gonna do?
Attachments
Last edited: