PM with interest sent.

Congratulations! Well done.

Correct.

Thank you, I will check out the book!

The shot above is 35mm Fuji Provia 100F, and I would believe there is clear difference between slide and negative film, like you point out.

I have probably not been exact enough when writing about my approach in my first post, because I am having difficulties understanding your response. Maybe I could try once more. If I use the image above as an example: Lets say that I use a 100 ASA film, a metering of the sky (highlights) results in 1/250 and a metering of the foreground rocks (midtones) results in 1/60. In this scene I would have used a 0.6 (two stop) ND grad. Here it would make no difference if the metering of the sky was the target or the foreground rocks. If the sky had been brighter, and resulted in a metering of 1/500, a 0.9 (three stop) ND grad would possibly have been correct (if the forground rocks remained 1/60). When shooting in daylight and with the sunlight coming sideways or from behind (yourself), my experience is that the 0.6 ND grad will fit most contexts. I have studied the book "Transient Light" by Ian Cameron, and he writes that he uses his 0.3 ND grad 2% , the 0.9 ND grad 7%, the 0.45 ND grad 20% and the 0.6 ND grad 70% in his overall shooting.

Well, I am trying to learn more about this subject, so any input is interesting. I could also be interested in books about photographic technique, where exposure and the use of ND grads is dealt with, so I would welcome suggestions about good literature on the subject.

Thanks Nigel! I also meter without the grad, but I target the highlights. So my approach would possibly be the total opposite of the one you are outlining. A slide with blown highlights is ugly, but a slide with too dark shadows can possibly be "rescued" in scanning or even tolerated as is.

Here is an example of a Fuji Provia 100F slide taken with a 0.6 soft edge ND grad, and with my approach of metering the sky, and exposing for the highlights.

I have a question about shooting slide film and estimating exposure when using natural density graduated filters. I currently use a Lee 100 filter system, including the Lee 100 hard edge ND grads.

One method I use when shooting landscapes is to measure the sky with spot metering on the camera. Most often I simply use the 0.6 NDG and adjust the exposure by decreasing the shutter speed with 2 stops. If the measurement of the sky shows a shutter speed of 1/250, I put on the 0.6 NDG and set the shutter speed to 1/60. In other words I expose for the highlights, and hope that the dynamic range of the film (roughly 5 stops for slide films) will capture the foreground and also shadow detail.

Another method of mine is to employ the matrix metering of the Pentax 67ii. With this method I simply position the 0.6 NDG in front of the lens, and let the camera work out the best exposure.

I know that one can take a very scientific approach to exposure and ND grads, for instance with using a spotmeter and measuring a scene in great detail. My simple method can often result in successfully exposed slides, other times the slides can end up too dark or have other exposure problems.

I would very much like to hear your views on my method for shooting slide film, exposure and ND grads. It would also be interesting to learn other ways of approaching slide film (maybe also digital capture), exposure and ND grads.

Nice set, I especially enjoy no. 2. What film have you used and how is the film scanned?

Excellent work, great images - all of them. A compact camera with a high quality zoom lens seems like the perfect travel companion.

Thank you all for interesting feedback! My aim with this thread was simply to show how the K28/3.5 performs within the 24x36 format, it is already one of my favourite lenses on APS-C. A future Pentax fullframe DSLR will possibly demand other things from legacy lenses than when one uses them with film cameras, but I suspect the K28/3.5 and many other Pentax lenses will perform flawlessly also on a 24x36 digital sensor.

I applied some "edge sharpening" to the film image, but no noise reduction. A touch of noise reduction could possibly have improved the image, but it is still 35mm film... (BTW: I love grain)

Thank you! I would love to go to Lofoten one day.

I recently managed to fix my Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 scanner, and as a result started to shoot 35mm film again. This scanner is possibly as good as it gets with 35mm film scanning, except for high quality drum scanning.

...film camera

This image was taken with a Pentax KX 35mm film camera loaded with Fuji Provia 100F, the K28mm at f8, tripod, MU and wire shutter remote. The colour positive was scanned on a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 scanner at max resolution. After scanning I try to process the scanned image studying the slide through a loupe as a benchmark.

I also include an image (for the sake of comparison) taken at the same location with the K5 + HD DA 15mm at f11. These shots were taken minutes apart, but with a slightly different perspective.

K28



DA15



K28 detail right



DA15 detail right



K28 detail center



DA15 detail center



K28 detail center left



DA15 detail center left



K28 detail left



DA15 detail left