I've seen quite a lot of professionally done Minox prints and to me they just don't hold up compared to prints from 35mm or even APS from a good camera.

I friend of mine is a Minox "nut". He goes to great lengths to coax

the maximum performance from his cameras. He does his own darkroom

work with some sort of special Minox enlarger and sometimes he even sends his images

out (to Minox?) for commercial processing. Despite this I'm not impressed. Even at 8x10, shots from my Nikon with lenses like the 50/1.8 or my Ricoh GR-1 are much sharper, even when he has to resort to Tech Pan and I'm using Tmax100.

Even APS prints look as good or better when using a decent camera

like the Elph Jr, though the film choice there is a little limited

right now.

 

<p>

 

I can't for the life of me understand why he bothers. You couldn't

reasonably need anything smaller than an Elph and even in 35mm a GR-1

isn't exactly huge and the advantages of the wider film choice and

clearly superior quality make using a Minox an excercise in futility

for anyone but a masochist or someone more concerned with the equipment he uses than the images it produces.

 

<p>

 

The surprising thing about a Minox isn't that it can compete with

larger cameras (which of course it can't), but that it gives tollerable

3x5 prints from such a small negative.

Hi Dana, a great number of Minox users (Minoxers) like the smallness of Minox and the fact that it really can produce 8x10" enlargements , which look as good as 8x10" from 35mm.

Mine 8x10" s do look as good as same size enlargements from Canon QL17 (35mm rangefiner with Canon 40/1.7 lens ), Konica T with Hexaon 50/1.8 lens,

Zeiss Ikon Contaflex with Tessar 50/2,8; Further, my own side by side comparison of 8x10" from my Minox B vs enlargements from my Canon Elph 370z, under a loup, shows that the Minox pictures has sharper detail.

In other words, my Minox B IS BETTER than Canon Elph 370z.

Dana, there is a subtle difference between 'look as good as" and IS BETTER.

Look as good as means to the naked eyes, IS BETTER means using a magnifying glass to scrutiny.

When I said my Minox B 's 8x10" looks as good as those listed 35mm cameras, I meant looked at with naked eyes; now if I pull out a loup and examine them, 8x10" from 35mm camera IS BETTER; with nake eyes, the 8x10" from Minox B LOOKS LIKE the side by side shots from Canon Elph 370z, but check under a loup, Minox B IS BETTER.

Minox cameras, even the electronics ones( except the smallest EC/ECX ) allows manuual control. Dana, my single reason for using Minox is that there is no compact 35mm nor APS can rival the range of flexibility of Minox, none, even the most exmpensive deluxe 35mm compacts like Leica Minilux nor Contax T2, Ricoh GR 1 can close focus to 8", and no compact has shutter speed of 1/2000; and Minox lens (COMPLAN or MINOX ) IS THE SHARPESS photographic lens, its intrincic resolution is over 300 lines pairs/mm, on film resolution is over 160 lpmm, better than any 35mm lenses I have, including Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.4; last but not least, Minox still is the smallest production camera.

Dana, to further illustrate the point that Minox camera has unique close up capability; I relate here some of my experiences while travel to Greece in 98. I carried a Leica R5 with 28-70 Vario Elmar zoom, a Contax T2

and a Minox C. At many museums, I could put the Minox close the display cabinet, and take close up pictures of archeological artifacts, none of my Leica nor T2 could.

I could close in on a flower, with Minox, but not the other two. You can copy a page of a book with Minox, even a diagram with Minox, you can never do it with any compact.

I have to carry Leica R5 with 60/2.8 Macro-Elmarit to rival the flexibility of a Minox

The minox can be ALWAYS carried (in a belt case, or in pocket/handbag)

and as such is a constant companion. It's size is it's strength, but

it (as noted above) has some quite impressive technical specs. I use a

IIIs as a constant companion (usually with b&w asa 400). I use my

newer model C with ASA 25 color for vacation pictures. You are

comparing Professional Minox to Professional 35's. Us Minoxers are

"mainly" recreational users, who delight in having a camera "at the

ready" when the 35MM users wishes they did.

>>Despite this I'm not impressed. Even at 8x10, shots from my Nikon

with lenses like the 50/1.8 or my Ricoh GR-1 are much sharper, even

when he has to resort to Tech Pan and I'm using Tmax100.

<p>

Sure, your Nikon produces a larger negative thus a better quality

print when looking at only the quality of the negative ("grain") but

what about the image itself? The Minox 8x11 takes plenty of shots

that your Nikon couln't even dream of taking. Just like your Nikon

can take many types of shots that, say, a 4x5 or 8x10 view camera

cannot.

<p>

>>The surprising thing about a Minox isn't that it can compete with

larger cameras (which of course it can't), but that it gives

tollerable 3x5 prints from such a small negative.

<p>

Compete in what sense, grain alone? You're right about that, but what

about in other ways? There are different tools for different jobs. A

Chevy Corvette can probably get from Seattle to Portland in about half

the time it takes a U-Haul Truck, but the U-Haul can take a lot more

stuff with it. So which vehicle wins in a competition?

<p>

The Minox 8x11 is a great camera capable of taking shots that no other

camera can take! That, among other things, is the major appeal of the

camera. The fact that nobody takes the camera seriously enough means

that people won't automatically strike up a purely fakey pose so that

the camera gets their "best side" makes the camera a jewel to behold.

<p>

I can ride my bicycle on the sidewalk, along trails, in a yard, and

even up or down a staircase. I can use my bike to snoop around in the

cracks of the city and mountains. A car can't do that, not even a

4-wheel drive, and that makes my bicycle "better" than a 4-wheel

drive, doesn't it? I think it's the same thing with a Minox camera.

Dana, every format has its place in photography, from Minox to 35mm, medium format and large format.

many of us Minoxers, have many cameras, across many formats, so we do understand the advantage of 35mm, or APS, or LF.

Do you know that Minox also makes 35mm camera ? one of the best 35mm pocket camera Minox GTE, and also several APS cameras.

I my self own a lot of 35mm cameras, Leica R5, Leica RE, Contax T2, Contax 139, Rollei 35, Minox GT-E, Minxo 35ML, Olympos xa2, Zeiss Ikon Contaflex, Zeiss Ikon Contessa, one Minolta, one Nikon compact.

two Elphs, the original and 370z. I have more than a dozen 24x36 or 20x30" enlargements made from 35mm negatives on my walls, my Minox ultraminature camera can never to that. But at the same time I am quite happy with the 8x10" made from

my Minox B and C.

What makes you think Minoxers owns only one camera ?

Minox is fun. Dana, Elph is very good, be happy.

Well, the very best pictures I have ever seen come out of 4-by-5-inch,

and larger, view cameras. If I were rich, and if I had a flunky or two

to trot along behind me carrying my baggage at all times, I'd get rid

of my submini and 35mm equipment tomorrow and shoot strictly from view

cameras. But as it is, I gotta pay for the stuff from my meager wages,

and even worse, nobody else will carry it for me. So I shoot 35mm and

subminiature. Most of the time I get the pictures I want. Luckily, the

lenses and films for these small formats just keep getting better and

better.

Three key realizations caused me to get into subminis after years of

shunning them: (1) The realization that films have gotten so much

better in the last few years, especially in terms of grain/speed

ratios. (2) The realization that exceedingly few of the pictures I take

ever have been destined for enlargement to 11 by 14 inches, or even to

8 by 10. (3) The realization that PhotoCD, my Mac, Epson printers and

Adobe Photoshop give me a kind of flexibility I've never had in a

lifetime in which I've never managed to have my own darkroom.

 

<p>

 

I'm an amateur with a preference for light, easily carried cameras with

the best optics I can afford. I'm not a pro, so the only time I need to

carry an inordinate amount of gear is when I do macro flower shooting.

Most of the time, a Minox submini and a small 35mm camera -- either a

Minox or a Leica M -- is all I need. The Minox submini and 35

combination is small and light enough to go everywhere, all the time,

in a small shoulder bag (usually an elderly Domke 803 Camera Satchel

with an extra padded liner) along with my phone, wallet, checkbook and

such stuff.

I've owned three APS cameras and got rid of each of them -- including

a $300 Canon Elph. Why? Because the pictures were not sharp.

Although I don't know if the APS format uses a pressure plate, the

absence of a pressure plate might explain the very disappointing

results I've obtained using these cameras. Frankly, I doubt whether

anyone could tell the difference between pictures shot with my Minox

8x11 and pictures shot with any APS camera, even an expensive one. And

the Minox can be carried anywhere.

I assume by Minox you are talking about the small format Minox

cameras a nd not the 35 mm Minox cameras....

I found some interesting messages at list Quest search<p>

 

<a

href="http://www.listquest.com/lq/view.cgi?ln=submini&sp=21&q=seth+moo

re&a=1&o=0&ci=c134813762&mid=2262"> $1000 16x20 Minox Cibachrome

print</a><P><a href=http://www.listquest.com/lq/view.cgi?ln=submini&mid=3143&sp=&q=meredith&b=1&s=1&o=0&ci=c090415006">20x24" from 9.2mm Agfa Copex Rapid</a>

This weekend I saw the new Canon Elph 2 APS camera. It is smaller then the original Elph, and has non pop up flash, even MRC (mid roll change ) function which the original Elph lacks.

The Elph 2 is lighter than my Rollei 16s, a 16mm camera. APS is certainly taking over 110 and 16mm formats in terms of quality and weight.

But still not possible to catch up with Minox 8x11 in weight and quality.

In a recent conversation between the manager of a custom photo lab

here in Chicago and myself, we discussed the look of prints made from

the Minox 8x11. Despite the fact that this lab specializes in large

format custom work, the lab personnel were impressed with these

prints, and not for being "good for a such a small camera". The

appeal is based on something deeper.

 

<p>

 

The Minox appeal is not based on grain, nor focus as compared with

35mm. The simple fact of the matter is that prints shot with a

Minox, in particular Black and White, do not look like prints from

any other camera. The mystique of the Minox gives the artist-

photographer a unique tool with which to construct a print. APS by

contrast, as in all point-n-shoots, produce bland shots regardless of

the level of grain or enlargeability.

 

<p>

 

Perhaps it is the fact that the Minox lens is about the same size as

the human pupil, perhaps its the design of the lens itself, or

perhaps there exists a zen like quality that cannot be quantified. A

35mm closed-minded Luddite must resort to the enlargeability fallacy

because most often such a "photographer" is unable to proudly stand

behind their own creative output regardless of format.

 

<p>

 

--Brian Warshawsky

I have to agree with Brian Warshawsky there is something about the

camera that creates its own style of imaging. I think it is simply

that forcing the photog to think about what goes on the minimalist neg

forces a better understanding of what should go on the neg. So if you

want good shots the brain goes has to go into gear. Those who espouse

larger negs, even 35mm is larger in this case, are in sense

pictoralist junkies; the picture gotta look exactly like the scene -

no grain, bright colors etc. Only trouble is the eye in fact doesnt

see it that way; the 35mm photog, in arguing they can make bigger

better 8 X 10 whatever, totally misses the point. Good minox photogs

create an image which conveys the feeling and look of the object.

Those who want technogly to generate a perfect grainless print miss

the whole point of the Minox which is to allow the creation of a good

picture when none would otherwise exist.

Use your eyes, get a Minox, learn to use you Minox and enjoy.

Graham

Graham,I quite agree with you,sir !Owning,shooting and processing

Minox stuff is having your grey cells moving like a PC hard drive !!!

Of course sometimes,under certain conditions and equipment,you can

take better shots with a SLR,APS or whatever,BUT !you'll never be

proud of that picture because in the end of the day,all you've done

was pointing the flippin'thing to a tree and press a button ! Where

is your PERSONAL contribution?Where's the personal touch of the

picture?And ,above all,where exactly is your good feeling of a well

done job?I personally,sleep a lot better after I worked hard to

achieve good results in,well,anything I do(not necessarily Minox...)

I mean,with all due respect and stuff,Dana,but it seems to me that

shooting with a Minox is actually an art,and the p&s cameras could

never ever touch the hem of 8x11 results.Best regards,Julian

<img

src="http://www.accessv.com/~martntai/public_html/pictures/canada/siho

u2.jpg">

<p> BCE Place, by Martin Tai. Minox TLX

I'd also like to know how folks scan 8 mm Minox negatives. They are so small...one would think that some sort of intermediate optical magnification would be needed to extract reasonably pixelated scans.

Art, there are many Minoxers use film scanners such as Polaroid

or Nikon scanners to scan minox film. The result from 2700 dpi scanners were acceptable for web display. 4000 dpi film scanners

will provide better result. See also thread

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003HVN

Speaking of scanning Minox negs:

 

On my last vacation, I took a good (for me) minox ECX snapshot and wanted to make copies. So, I took the snapshot to my local photo shop, and just scanned it to a floppy. I planned to make some 5x7's for family members. But, when I got home, and loaded the image (which was around 500kb) I was amazed at the quality of the image, from color 100 film--particularly the lack of grain and the sharpness of the image. The shot was a mid-range portrait, with a scenic background--but everything was in focus.

 

I was amazed. Full size, 100% magnification, according to MS Photo Editor is larger than my monitor (21") and it still looks good, but a little grainy. At 25% it's a snapshot size, and 50% is a beautiful 8x10.

 

I just found out about the scan service from the Minox Memo, and I plan to try that with my next roll of film. Would appreciate any feedback on this service, since I understand that scans work better on negatives than prints.

 

I am sold on this thing, thought it was just for snapshots.<div></div>

Russ, the ECX can be made into a perfect document copying Minox,

just like the full function Minox cameras see

 

<a href="http://www.accessv.com/~martntai/public_html/manual/eccopy2.htm">Close up photography and Document copying with Minox EC/ECX</a>

The APS film format is small, subminiature, being smaller than the 35mm frame. In one mode the film strip is only 9mm heigh. The 8x11 frame of the Minox or 7x10 with the last of the Minox enlargers is almost the same but with a much better lens. No one disputes the quality of the lens of the Minox. The only arguements is what you get when you print from 8x11 compared to 35mm negatives.

 

The work done by http://www.8x11film.com with microfilms including Copex and Imagelink has shown that very large prints easily match the performance of 35mm cameras. Just as 35mm cameras have taken advantage of the new colour negative films so has Minox in Minocolor 100 Pro.

 

When taking close up photographs few compact cameras can get below 1.2m (4ft) and so what you wanted to take is often smaller than the Minox frame of 8x11. With the Minox cameras close focusing to 20cm (8") is possible and the full 8x11 frame used. Some SLR can do better and there are cameras with macro facilities but the Minox has been the same 20cm to infinity focusing since the very first Riga in 1938. The other aspect of the 15mm Minox lens is the wide depth of field. More of the image is sharp compared to taking the same photograph with a 35mm from the same location. Grain should not be confused with a lack of sharpness. If you enlarge a negative taken with a 35mm Nikon to the same magnification as you need for a 3x5" print from a Minox the Minox shows that it is not inferior, only having to cope with a tiny negative. With modern ultra fine grain film the distinction becomes less than it was even a few years ago.

 

As to why Minox cameras. One of the main reasons is that the camera does get carried and less likely to get left behind. Even the light Ixus and Minox 35mm cameras are 'big' and often left behind as 'too much' to carry. I seldon forget to pocket an LX or EC but have had to return to pick up a Minox 35mm that I wanted to carry to test. Often it is a case of Minox or no picture and whether prints are acceptable is irrelevant when the choice is nothing at all to show.

This thread has become very interesting to me, and I've started to investigate by funding an experiment with those GEPE/Minox slide frames. These frames should be arriving from the factory in couple of weeks and I'd like to purchase a fairly complete range of representative Minox color and B&W films to run through my Nikon 4000ED scanner. If any of you could direct me to a source of "known good" test and precision reference targets - it would be appreciated.

 

I've even developed a "parallel track" for these experiments with some old Bolex movie cameras loaded with Kodachrome 25 (still available). Have also purchased a specialized 1942 Revere 8mm/16mm enlarger ....but haven't yet figured out how to turn this into a digitizer. The projected image seems quite sharp though - so I see some potential here...particularly for time lapse.

 

Would be interesting to see if this enlarger would also work with Minox film strips.

Art, you can buy test targets from Edmond Scientific or Chasseur d'Image magazine from Paris.

Art, the best films in Minox 8x11 camera which can provide 8x10" prints comparable with same size prints from Leica 35mm camera are Kodak Technical Pan and Agfa Copex Rapid( developed in SPUR )<P>

See http://www.8x11film.com <p>

High resolution fine grain film is essential.