I have just published a test of the Pentax 67's 2X Extender vs. the 1.4X Extender. The test was done with the Pentax 400mm f/4 ED(IF) lens. What made the test interesting as well as problematic was the expected Pentax 67 problems of shutter vibration, and the need for approriate support when shooting with such very long lens combinations (800mm).

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/p-ext.htm

Michael

The Luminous Landscape

-- Michael Reichmann (mreichmann@rogers.com), April 17, 2002

Answers

Michael, if you hadn't already made your site, you should be forced by law to do so.

-- Peter Gooijer (rockrose@freeler.nl), April 20, 2002.

Michael, Another EXCELLENT commentary. Thanks once again. You mention in your summary that you had used a similar/same combination in Yellowstone in the winter. If you don't mind me asking, and I don't mean this to sound in any way insulting, or stupid, but do you know how much all your usual field gear weighs? Also, and again if you don't mind saying so, do you transport it all yourself? Just curious. It sounds like it would require at least two fit people to get it to a remote location.

-- Carl Tower (cjtowerman@yahoo.com), April 20, 2002.

Michael, One question on your test; You are talking on heavy tripods and vibrations. To me it looks as if you are using the onepoint technique. The lens/camera are only fastened in one point - the tripods head. Using long lenses I do always try to get as much support as possible. Best support is simply laying the camera on ground. Landscapes like yours testsite I always try to get support from the tipod and an additional point (I love viewpoints with a sturdy banister)

-- Bert Wiklund (bw@bwfoto.dk), April 21, 2002.

Carl,

My camera kit depends on the type of shooting I anticipate doing, and I have a few different packs to use based on whether I'm mostly shooting from a vehicle or doing extensive hiking.

For day hikes I try not to carry a camera backpack weighing more than about 20 lbs, excluding the tripod which is carried with a shoulder sling. This means something like a Lowepro Mini Trecker. I'm middle aged, but in reasonably good shape, and can hike for hours with such a setup. It means leaving something like the 400mm f/4 at home though.

The MiniTrecker is an airplane carry-on, and the tripod goes in a dufflebag with my clothes.

For my recent Yellowstone shoot ( http://www.luminous- landscape.com/yellowstone-winter.htm ) for example, where most of the shooting was from the vehicle, I use the Lowepro Roadrunner AW, a large rolling backpack style bag, which held everything I needed for a week-long shoot, including 2 MF bodies and 5 lenses, one of which was the Pentax 400mm f/4 ED(IF).

The bag weighed 55 lbs (I know because the airline weighed it). I could pack it for a few hundred yards, and did, but that's about it. It's sturdy enough to be checked as lugged and because it has wheels as well as a pack design, can be wheeled through airports rather than carried.

If I'm using this bag and need to hike I simply take what I need and put it in the pockets of my shooting vest. The camera and one lens goes over my shoulder with the tripod on its sling as always.

Hope this helps.

Bert,

You're quite right. But, if you go back and re-read the article you'll see that I did use, and also mentioned, the Manfrotto 359 Support Arm, which is a must for this type of photography.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/359.htm

Michael

-- Michael Reichmann (mreichmann@rogers.com), April 21, 2002.

Many people tried the Pentax 67, and gave up, saying that the images were not sharp. I found it was true if I used a lesser tripod, say, a Bogen 3021 which I did try out. The shutter shock problem of the P67 demands much heavier support, even with the mirror locked up, especially when shooting horizontals. The movement of the shutter mass creates an internal torque about the camera's mass center, so it actually twists during the shot. This is much less a problem for verticals, since ironically since we need to flip it to the side of the ball head the torque now has to fight with a much more rigid tripod axis. Try to twise your 3021 the both ways, and you'll understand what do I mean. It is by some means a handicapped system, on which one can't fire at 1/8 and 1/15, and for which a Grizo 1548 is absolutely necessary, even it costs a fortune and offsets a very cheap MF system otherwise. However counting in the $1k for the 1548 the system is still inexpensive, cheaper than many of my friends 35mm outfits. I also use a short aluminum center column with the setup, on which I drilled three holes across the center so that whenever I shoot I stick through a philips screw driver I always carry, and hung my 25 lb. (at least) Domke Outpack backpack to weight down the tripod. It will look funny, but as a physicist I found nothing substitutes the physical weight in the role damping out the shutter vibration, especially when shooting horizontal, even the carbon fiber (or wood) legs do absorb the vibrations much better than the metal ones. The Domke bag is of a "vertical" design so that I can access my gear while it is on the center column, very convenient. I would feel unsecure whenever my set up is not weighted down by the heavy bag, especially in windy days. The results? I routinely enlarge my 6x7cm chromes to 24x30 on Lightjet, still with details to be seen inches away (many viewers sware they are from 4x5 originals), and publications including two covers last year. I have found my 200mm plue 2x images sharp enough for 16x20s with this set up.

-- Leping Zha (leping@tamri.com), April 23, 2002.