Hey! Another Irix 150mm user!!

No. 2 with the bottom row of buds cropped off. And No. 4 with the left hand row of buds cropped off. The centres of the clusters of buds, from which the stalks radiate outwards, draws the (or at least my) eye and distracts from the bee. No. 3 would work better if there were more space above the bee, it seems rather squashed against the edge of the frame.

Steve

Although not a fan of IR, I do rather like those false colour images. Keep up the trial and error!

Steve

A classic Pentax dog portrait lens, by any chance??

How many members of this forum have not bought something from LennyBloke, aka John, or at least been tempted...

Steve

And then there's the uplit, lantern look. A lantern needs darkness in which to shine...




Steve

I can't disagree with that. They were produced independently, at different times, and as experiments with different lighting. Putting them together for this thread was an afterthought. But just for you, LennyBloke, here's one made today with a wet hop and a light background (not the same background as before, I haven't yet got total control and reproducability of light - but I will eventually!!).




Steve

Yes, definitely painterly, and all the better for that. But at least it's possible to make out what's in the distance. I can remember taking a similar picture on holiday in which it was impossible to say what was outside the car (and in case you're wondering, the car was parked - I wasn't driving blind while holding a camera!).

Steve

If my memory is correct, the story (which may or may not be true) was that the original intention was to put the MX-1 sensor in the original Q. However, the sensor wasn't going to be ready in time so an available, but smaller, sensor had to be used. Meanwhile, the lenses had been designed for the bigger sensor. The MX-1's sensor (or something very similar) eventually went into the last two versions of the Q. I've got one of them (Q-S1) and the sensor is noticeably better. But the body is a bit bigger, much more 'plasticky', doesn't seem as robust and IMHO doesn't have the same 'fun' feel as the original Q.

Steve

Thanks.

It is indeed, even though the photographic press dismissed it because of its small sensor and it didn't sell well because of its high price. But most people who bought it came to love it and appreciate the quality of its tiny lenses. If any camera can be considered 'fun', this is the one. And what other camera with a full set of lenses from wide angle to telephoto will fit in a jacket pocket ??

Steve

When the bottles are empty, I don't even try to type - the result might be too embarrassing .

Steve

Believe it or not, so do I ...

Steve