don_miller2

The photo.net article was written before the new 70-300 IS was released, I believe. The DO isn't lighter than the non-DO, just shorter. The non-DO is the better performer by a meaningful but not huge margin. The DO makes sense if size is extremely important.

I'm currently using the new 70-200f/4 L IS. This is one of the best zooms ever made. But it is not necessarily better than the 70-300 IS above 200 with the 1.4 TC. I have not made a direct comparison.

The new 70-300 IS is a special lens and an extremely good value. So the short answer I would give it to start with that lens. It's one half the price of the alternatives. If you find you are mostly shooting 200mm and below and really like that range, upgrade to the 70-200.

If you go with the DO lens, two point. 1)Shading is critically important and 2) Don't use a protective filter. People who understand the lens special needs to protect against stray light get excellent results. People who throw on a UV filter and shoot away like any other lens get many low contrast images.

It will definitely produce superior pics to what you can get from a 350CDN digicam, so that would make it seems like a good deal. But if it breaks, it's 'totaled'. Why don't you suggest to you friend that you both share the loss if it breaks in the next 60 days? That might prevent stress on your friendship if something goes wrong.

I still have my D60 that I bought within a few weeks of introduction. (2002?) I don't use it, but I've lent it to a friend several times. I've photoshopped and printed her best images. I'm still impressed by the high quality.

I've owned one for years and it's on the digital camera I lend out. The 24-105 is considerably sharper but also 2.5 times the price. The 28-135 is an excellent value, but not sharp when compared to L zooms and inexpensive primes.

Stopped down it is pretty good. I made a few large prints from shots a friend took with my D60/28-135 combo. The prints are very nice. Easily sell-able as wall art at 16x24.

So what your are seeing is probably the normal expected performance of the lens.

Even the 24-105 is only fair quality at the wide end.

George, I think you have to assume these lens are of equal quality.

As zooms both are going to be somewhat soft wide open. I put my kit together with f4 zooms because I have fast primes in the same range. Several wedding photogs I know have stuck with the 24-70 because they wanted better sharpness at f4-f5.6 and switch lens/cameras for longer shots. With the great high ISO performance of Canon, I don't feel that IS is necessary in this range. The only exception I have found is shooting stage performances hand held at 1/15 - 1/30, f8 - f11. There is no substitute for image stabilization in this situation.

My simple conclusion is that the 24-105 is the better walk about/PJ/travel lens (smaller, longer, IS). The 24-70 is the better indoor people lens (faster, sharper sooner). Hope this helps.

I use Gamma, but I print digital so I only use them for developing. I've recently have brought several small orders to Solaris in Schaumburg and they've come back fine. But again developing only.

I'm surprised you're shooting slides for darkroom prints. Not worth it IMO except for cibachrome.

Provia 400F. I shoot 6x17 and frequently find myself using this film instead of Velvia 100f. Pushing Velvia can lead to unexpected (wild) results.

Also, pushing Provia 100 to 200 works well.

I've compared Velvia 50, 100 and Provia 100 in the exact same scene/lens with 4x5 and the difference in color is not as much as one might expect. If your printing digitally how you handle and enhance colors in photoshop will have a much bigger impact to the final print than the difference in films.

Don

Sams idea seems best for true camera movements. You could also trade the 72xl for the 80xl if you want a fast light lens in that range. Or the 110xl and a 40-60mm digital lens.

Possibly sell the 6x9 back and crop the 6x12 to save weight. Have you looked at largeformatphotography.info for lightweight lenses?

For true handheld without movements badgergraphic is listing the new chinese Fotoman 6x12 and 6x17 which takes standard LF lenses (instead of LF lenses marked up 2.5 times as panoramic glass).

Good luck, Don

Thank all for your response.

I will try all these films - direct comparisons being easy but somewhat costly with sheet film. Adding 400NC to the list is a good idea - the little extra grain wont matter with large film size and might be useful in wind.

I wonder if part of the problem some people have with the Kodak "V" films is over-warming. These films tend to go red, and at least with the slide film one can't be as casual with using warming filters as with fuji. I'm curiuos how VC film work with fall foliage. The classic use of these films I'm familiar with is red-rock southwestern US photography.

Rolfe, what are you flying in your self portrait?

Also, I would still like to know if any of these films have a good or bad reputation for scanning.

Don

Oskar said,

"Your first paragraph is a bit unclear: you want "film to handle higher contrast situations", but "film to handle higher contrast situations" as you would "not be shooting in very high contrast light". Do you mean that you want something in-between, ie. lower contrast than slides but not really the lowest contrast?"

Yes. I would normally not bother to shoot LF in contrasty light, but there are times in good light that slide film blocks up in the shadows. An example of this might be mid morning sun backlighting trees in fall foliage. So I'm looking for a neg film to use outside of "golden hour" and cloudy days. Also, for some kinds of work I'm getting tired of the high contrast magazine-style look of modern slide films. I would like to start experimenting with subtler colors and greater tonality.

I'd like two or three more stops than provia. That would be enough. I'm not looking for an all purpose kind of film I can use at noon and get a decent print.

Don

I'm looking for advice on color print films to supplement my normal

choice of velvia and provia. I'm a landscape shooter who has not

used color negative film in years. I would like to find a print film

to handle higher contrast situations. I do not want a low contrast

film, as I typically would not be shooting in very high contrast

light. I do not need a fast negative film.

As I shoot primarily sheet film, my choices seem to be 160/400 NC,

VC and Fuji NPS. By description 160VC sounds like the best choice

(med. contrast and saturated) but the reviews in the archieve are

very polarized (pun intended).

I will test these films myself, but I would like feedback from those

with experience in landscape and nature photography.

Also, I have no experience scanning negatives. Is there a good

source for learning the details of this process? Thanks.

Don

Thank you for your answers.

Ellis, how rigid is this camera at long extension? Do you still use this model? Thanks for the help.

Per, I will email Claire. Thanks.

Don

I am considering purchasing this camera for 6x17 and 4x5 only. My

use is field, including day backpacking. I?m looking for ~600mm of

draw. What?s you opinion of this camera? What are other camera

choices?

Thanks.

Don Miller

I thought this was a joke until I checked the link.

Talk about technology overkill. If one cannot handle loading film then LF is going to be way too "physical" anyways.

I would be wary of purchasing this camera without seeing it in person. Toyo is a reputable company so I'm sure the camera works, but it is the cheapest looking piece of photography gear I have ever seen. When I asked to see the 45CF in a large store the salesman literally didn't want to touch it. So perhaps this biased my opinion. But put a Shen Hao next to it and it makes the chinese camera look like it's worth $3000.

I suggest the Shen Hao or a used would field camera. If weight is a big issue and you can spend a little more look for a used Wista.

Don

Hi Ted

I find it difficult to tighten down sufficiently for my 6lb 4x5 camera. If I'm not careful the camera will move when inserting quickload or polaroid. The acratech is very well made, however.

I'm thinking that using a pan/tilt or similar head is a better match for a camera with movements. With a ball head there is always the issue of level and plumb.

I use the arca swiss style quick release system.

Hi Ed,

For your requirements, definitely the Epson 3200. The Canon 9900F would be my second choice. Look here for a review of both:

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/

Note that the 3200 is at two different price points depending on the software bundle (at least in the U.S.).

Don

Anyone currently using them for E6 mail order processing?

$1.15 for 4x5 with free return shipping over $75 seems hard to beat

from a reputable lab.

I fedex to my 'local' lab anyways. They do a good job at twice this

price.

(And no, I have no intention of doing my own E-6 processing)

With fall almost upon us in the northern half of the world I've begun

again to think about how I can use my 4x5 in really low light. I like

to take misty, saturated dawn (pre-dawn) shots. But how to focus?

Here's my list so far, please critique:

-Artificial light. Someone speculated in the archive's about using a

laser pointer. Or, if I'm near the truck, I could use a halogen

spotlight.

- Preset hyperfocal. Make a chart with the millimeter settings for

certain lens/aperture combinations. No movements but easy.

- Preset focus with front tilt. Many of my setups are typical near-

far landscape shots. Perhaps I could use the prefocus idea and

include a preset tilt? This probably wouldn't work on my new field

camera (no scale) but it might with a monorail.

So, how do you work with 1EV?