didjiman

<p>I use a Leica M9, I use an XPan (actually I have two XPan II), I think I know something about these cameras. Cropping M9 images to XPan ratio does not equal to even Tri-X film from the XPan. All 3 XPan lens are superb and I use them all. 30mm is not too wide if you have a use for it:</p>

<p><img src="http://richardmanphoto.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/9-20120504-Scanned-6.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="487" /></p>

<p>I actually think the 30mm VF is bigger than it should be. One of those gorgeous Zeiss finder with proper mask may be ideal.</p>

<p>XPan must be used with a tripod in pano mode? Surely you jest :-)?</p>

<p>See my book here:<br>

http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963</p>

<p>Mostly XPan photos, all handheld<br>

// richard</p>

<p>The Mamiya doc confuses so many people. Come on, think logically: the metering pattern in not TTL. Therefore its size and shape is constant in relation to the... Viewfinder. All these talks about it changes when different lens is used is just confusing the matter. Forget about the framelines, if you can map out where the metering spot is in your viewfinder, then it will stay there, regardless of your lens. This is what Giovanni is trying to say. How it relates to the framelines for different lens in size and location is another matter, but you can just ignore that.</p><div></div>

Alex, check out my TX-2 pics of Kyoto, Nikkou and Kanazawa at http://www.dragonsgate.net/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=3246 Scanned using LS-8000 and the glass holder at 4000 DPI. I have printed pictures 24" x 64" size and it looks pretty darn good. I don't know about the Epson scanner though.

 

// richard

Thanks Ilkka. I know it is hard to do, but Huw did it, so it can be done again!

Well, looks like Huw Finney are busy with *something* so he never finishes the

XPan fast lens nor the digital M2 mad projects. To recap, here's what *we* (the

royal we) want: fast (F2 but not faster due to Xpan RF baselength) 35 or 50 lens

for normal and not pano view. Why? Because then you can carry your Xpan outfit

plus one extra lens and you'd be good for most everything. I know I can sell at

least one lens to Lutz :-)

 

Here's what we know:

- You can still buy the Nikon-Xpan adapter for Nikon F, for around $300.

- Huw came up with the idea to make a RF CAM to couple his Chinnon SLR lens

 

Leica M lens are probably no good due to their shorter flange distance.

 

So if someone does the same RF cam hack to a Nikon lens, wouldn't that work?

You are probably thinking about the GR-D. This is a FILM camera!

Works great if you like rangefinder photography. The two minuses for me have been slightly largish (as compared to an M, not to a SLR or dSLR) and the clacky shutter. OTOH, it's still smaller than a D80 and the like and the shutter is reasonably quiet, just not as quiet as an M.

 

What shutter delay? There's no autofocus and no mirror blackout so the delay must be at most in the 50 msec range, if that. The VF is bright and clear - different from an M. I prefer the M VF, but the RD-1 VF is quite competent.

First Dawn<div></div>

> This is for Richard Man. How long ago did your failure happen? How long and where was the xtol stored?

 

Around May. The mistake I made was to stored Xtol 1+1 instead of stock. I store it in the "accordian" type of bottle. Didn't know storing diluted is a problem and it has been working for 2+ 5 liter set, but then all the sudden, when the 3rd set if ~half gone. BANG. It is very disheartening, I tell ya.

I used 2 5 liter packs of Xtol with no problem, then BANG, failure. The experts still said it's probably a problem with my process somewhere. While that may be true, I have moved on to 777. Highlights to die for...

John, what makes you think it's a good picture?

I bought one last month after the Lacie Electro-Blue dies. The choice was either the Eizo or the Apple 23". I believe what you are describing is the narrow viewing angle of the Eizo. You do pretty much have to look at the picture straight on to get the most accurate colors. However, in most uses, it does not matter. What cinched the decision for me though was that the Eizo displays much better tonal range for B&W, which is what I do most.

I have developed ~300 rolls of B&W in the last couple years with the Jobo CPE2.

Last couple rolls I am experiencing some damages to the emulsion. I have started

trying to use PermaWash (1 min water, 1 min PermaWash, 1 min 2x change of water)

instead of the 10x change of water that I used to use. Can the PermaWash cause

this kind of problem, or is it something else?

 

Thanks.<div></div>

The key is to have a good working process to eliminate dust in the first place. Google photo.net and you will see some links. Most of our time, most of my scans do not show (much) dust any more. For web res, a 20 sec clone stamp work do the job most of the time.

Hwu finished it on April 1st. Check the archive.

Steve, backlight, can't see sh*t :-)

 

How is the Minolta Elite II treating you? Keep the Nokton 35/1.2 and sell everything else, then buy a 50/1.4 ASPH. If you start listerning to me, you will not be spending so much times buying and selling cameras and lenses!!

I have a 12587 regular hood with a cutout on the upper left for the VF. I know it fits some version of the 35'lux really well and the 35 'lux ASPH OK but not great. If you are interested, email me.

Yes they did.

Sorry Steve, I don't have direct experience, but consider:

a) the 35/1.2 is much bigger and heavier and more difficult design (10 elements blah blah blah)...

b) your camera likely either has framelines for 35 or 40, but not both. It may or may not matter, depending on how accurate the framelines are and whether you care about precision framing.

c) That 1/2 stop difference may not really exist in real life.

 

My advice is to stay with your 40/1.4 and either save up for a real Leica, for whatever that is worth, or save up for a different focal length.

Hi Frederick, as I understand it, if you just use desaturation and hue adjustment, you are still throwing out color information. Consider you are using your HP5+, it has certain color responses, may be stronger in one than others etc. By using channel mixer, you can adjust the color responses to get the B&W look you want. Whereas if you not just using desaturation, you are just throwing information away.

 

Something like that. I am not an expert, but may be it will get you started.

Scanning B&W negs is hardly difficult at all. See my recent post on Digital Darkroom on comparing Nikon vs. Minolta. The key may be to use a good scanning program like Vuescan. Set it to B&W neg, White Balance, and generic film type and the scans are just fine. This is my experience with Delta, HP5+, Tri X, Efke 100 pushed and non pushed, Xtol and Rodinal etc.

re: Les

Well, I don't know about other people's workflow, but I stick the film in, open Vuescan, and click :-) Very much less than an hour for sure :-)

Hi Erik, sorry, I don't mean to devalue the Scan Enhancer. My post was more in response to some people (not yours, I believe) statement that Nikon Coolscan is "useless" for B&W scan and that the Minolta Elite 5400 with the grain dissolver is *MUCH* better. For my cup of tea, my tests demonstrate there aren't a whole lot of difference. If I do not have a scanner currently, I may go out and get the Elite5400, or if I have a LS-5000, I may purchase the Beta Scan Enhancer, but for now, I do not see benefits or not continue to use my LS-4000.

 

Thanks.