john y.k. lee

I'm not sure if this addresses your question, but here goes. The ONLY way that I can get my HP 7960 to print beautiful black and white pictures is to physically remove the color cartridges (57 and 58). This forces the printer to print in "backup" mode with the 59 cartridge only.

 

When I printed b/w pictures simply by pressing the "print in greyscale" option and while leaving all three cartridges in, the b/w pictures came out with a magenta cast. Only by physically removing the cartridges did the pictures come out correctly. This is despite pressing and clicking all the right options.

 

Hence, if you are trying to print b/w with the 59 cartridge, just pull the others out. If you are trying to print black only, just put the 56 cartridge in and leave the others out.

 

I hope this helps.

I want to thank everybody for their advice. This is exactly what makes the internet and this site so powerful.

 

At this point, I am planning to carry my F100 and 24-85. I will also carry a 24/2.8 which I just bought. (Wow. it is really quite small). And, I will take the 105/2.5.

 

Although the 24/2.8 duplicates a focal length on the zoom, the less prominent barrel distortion may make a difference in some shots. If I find that there is no need for the 24 prime (since the horizon is full of mountainous peaks anyway), I'll pack it for the porter.

 

Now, I need to get in shape for the arduous journey.

I may have an opportunity to hike the Inca Trail in May. I am

currently debating what equipment to bring. I want to trim down my

gear, because I carried way too much stuff recently while in Costa

Rica.

 

I currently own an F100, 24-85 AFS G, 80-200/2.8, 35/1.4, 105/2.5,

Tamron 90 macro.

 

I love the 24-85 since it is small and has matrix metering; however,

the barrel distortion at the wide end makes it impossible to take

landscapes with the horizon. (I learned this the hard way after

hiking the Grand Canyon last year). The 80-200/2.8 is too heavy. I

will probably pick either the 105 or the 90 macro but not both. I

love my 35/1.4. Do I need something on the wider end?

 

I am considering purchasing the 17-35/2.8. I wanted to hold off on

buying this, since I am getting the digital itch and am not sure

which wide angle to purchase.

 

What I am asking, then, is what recommendations anybody might have

for lens selection for this particular trip.

One day in my rush to get a good solid tripod, I bought a used 3011. It is definitely worth the money, but as the previous poster mentioned, the legs cannot be extended any more than one particular angle. Hence, ground-level shooting is impossible. Forget macrophotography with this tripod.

Thanks for everybody's responses. I took everybody's advice. I cleaned the back, checked the custom settings, and pressed the shutter release. Basically, it seems that I have to press the shutter release to advance the film, even though it is on the option to advance automatically. Nevertheless, this is a simple thing to do. Thanks for the prompt and helpful response.

My Nikon F100 is having difficulty with film loading. Usually, I

just drop the film in and line up the sprockets and close the back.

This automatically winds the film, and I have confirmation because

the film counter goes to one after an appropriate noise.

 

Recently, however, I have had tremendous difficulty with film

loading. There seems to be some sensor that isn't working. The film

won't load. I pull the film out a little and close the back again.

I have to try at least twenty times before it catches and loads.

This is incredibly frustrating.

 

Does anybody know why this is happening?

Very interesting responses, and in fact, this is the reason I love photo.net. I haven't made up my mind yet, though, despite the plethora of answers. I will look through some more pictures and try to decide what I want to photograph.

I just got this lens over Christmas and am still learning its uses and limitations. here is a shot on Ilford HP5 plus pushed to ISO 800 at f1.4 1/30sec handheld. I love the lens.<div></div>

This is obviously a question based on individual preferences and

biases. Nevertheless, my dilemma is whether to attend a RMNP

workshop in Olympic National Park or in Yosemite in May.

 

Obviously, the instructors are different, and this introduces

another variable into the equation besides the choice of location.

But, if there were no difference between the two, where would you

prefer to photograph?

 

I am leaning towards Yosemite because I would love to experience the

mountains of Yosemite and see the famous landscape portrayed by the

likes of Ansel Adams. However, I think the workshop in Olympic

National Park is an excellent one with a well-respected workshop

leader. The only downside is that I don't find the pictures of

Olympic National Park to be as interesting to me as pictures of

Yosemite. Perhaps I am simply not someone who loves rainforests. I

know there is incredible biodiversity in Olympic National Park, but

I'm just not sure about it.

I just wanted to submit a picture that I took with the Nikon 35/1.4. This shot was f1.4 wide open at 1/30 second on Ilford HP5 400 pushed to 800. I could not have gotten this shot without this lens. I love it.

Having just bought the Epson 7960 one week ago, I am definitely happy with the black and white output. My major concern echoes yours. I have printer seven full 8x10 black and white prints, and the 89 cartridge is 60% used up. Hence, I probably only have another five prints to go. This is certainly a problem.

 

I bought the 20 sheets of HP premium photo plus 8.5x11 paper at 50% off from COMP-USA for $17.99/2 = $8.98. Hence, each sheet is about $0.45. Then, the 89 cartridge is about $30. So, twelve prints has costed me $35.40 = $2.95 per print.

 

In reality, this is cheaper than sending it to my professional lab here in Pittsburgh. They charge $7.95 with a 14 day turn around time. The local lab will print on color paper for $4.95 with color inks, but that is not a real solution.

 

Hence, the ability to make my own prints with faster turn around, albeit with more investment on my part, makes the cost of this particular printer worth it.

 

Obviously, I have not answered your question as to whether the Canon printer might be better. I guess, I have absolutely no idea, how to profile the Canon printer to make it print better bw, and I'm not sure I want to learn that either.

 

Good luck, Dhiren.

Thanks for the responses. I increased the scanner specs to 16 bit and the dpi to 600dpi. This helped a little. I guess the poor image quality is simply the limitation of trying to scan a negative using methods designed for reflective surfaces.

I read Michael Reichman's article on Luminous Landscape for using a

flatbed scanner to create a digital contact sheet. Basically, I

place my BW negatives in a clear sleeved page and then scan it as a

regular photo on my Epson 1670 scanner. Then I invert the image in

Adobe Photoshop and use it as a contact sheet aftre adjusting it with

Levels.

 

What I am curious about is what method to best optimize my picture.

I have played with the levels both pre-scan using the Epson software

and have adjusted after inverting the image. I keep getting severe

posterization. Perhaps I should scan at higher dpi. Right now I'm

scanning at 300 dpi. Perhaps I should shift the initial scan to the

left with a higher gamma. Can anybody offer suggestions.

Again, thanks everyone. I did purchase the lens to be used indoors at wide apertures. But what is really odd is that I was trying to take pictures inside a house, but because the sun was setting it peeped in through the window and caused tremendous flare.

 

Thanks for the advice. I look forward to actually seeing some pictures with my new lens.

I appreciate the input regarding fast lenses and internal lens flare. This is the first f1.4 lens I have ever owned and indeed the lens flare is quite dramatic.

 

I do appreciate those of you who warned me to protect my eyes. I did not intentionally point the lens at the sun, but rather in attempting a composition, the low-lying winter sun ended up in the viewfinder. Whoa!!!! I couldn't see a thing. I quickly closed my eyes. I think my retinas are okay :)

I just purchased for Christmas a Nikkor 35/1.4 AIS from keh.com in

BARGAIN condition. I think the lens in excellent shape; however, I

am surprised by the amount of lens flare. If I point this lens

directly into the sun, the lens flare is quite dramatic!!!

 

Is this typical for this lens which probably requires more internal

elements in order to focus closely. OR is this a function of

purchasing a lens in bargain condition? Perhaps there is dust

inside the lens which is what makes it "bargain" condition.

Any insight by the experts on photo.net would be greatly appreciated.

 

I have not actually developed any pictures yet, but I look forward

to it.

Very interesting question, because I have had the exact same problem. I usually just open and close a few times and it will engage, but I remember a situation where it simply would not engage the film. It took over twenty attempts. Next time I'll try rewinding the film again as the last photographer suggested.

I just got back from Seoul. Basically, I got off at the Chungmuro exit and asked around until I finally found the corner that the previous posters have described. In order to consistently find the right corner, simply leave the Chungmuro station at exit #5 and walk down the sidewalk. A the third street, make a right and you will see the Fuji dealer on the left hand side. Make another right and you will see World Photo on the left hand side.

 

I processed about twenty rolls of film at World Photo. I haven't really had time to review them yet, but I was sure glad to have them processed before going through multiple x-ray scanners at the airports. The price was quite competitive and their turn-around time was excellent.

Ellis, I appreciate your unequivocal answer. I too will stick with my F100 for now. I have been waiting for the right time to buy a digital SLR. My plan is to wait for the D2X to come out and then to buy a used or <$2000 D1X.

Again thank you everybody. Now that I went to Barnes and Noble and sat down and read John Shaw's Closeup in Nature book, all of your answers make a lot of sense. I have an old minolta 50mm lense which will hopefully reverse mate with my Tamron. I will try that.

 

In addition, I am still trying to fiddle with the teleconverter. If I can't get it to fit correctly, I'll try Arnab's trick of putting the PK-18 between the two. Although, I will have purchase this equipment.

 

How come nobody has suggested the 90 macro with a 35mm lens in reverse? Shouldn't this give 3x magnification?

Thanks everybody for the quick answers. It seems that I had better consult John Shaw's book, because the plethora of answers and their variety definitely tell me that there is no easy answer here.

 

In addition, I'm not sure why the Nikon adaptall won't mount on the Tamron SP1.4x teleconverter. Maybe I'm just not being forceful enough, although I don't want to break the TC since it works well with my 80-200/2.8 AF-D lens.

 

I like the idea of simply putting a teleconverter since it is the easiest solution, although I can see how optical quality will suffer.

 

I will definitely have to read about reversing the lenses and placing extension tubes and/or bellows. The Tamron filter thread is 55mm; hence, this should make some mating difficulties with standard Nikon lenses, but I'll figure it out.

 

I want to photograph some of the rat surgery that I'm doing right now, and I don't have camera adapted to the Zeiss microscope.

I currently use a Tamron 90/2.8 Adaptall 2 mount for Nikon on my

Nikon F100 as a macro setup. However, I would like to go beyond

1:1. I thought I could simply attach a teleconverter and go that

route. However, I cannot seem to attach my Tamron SP 1.4x

teleconverter to the Adaptall mount. Does anybody know if this setup

should work or not? I know that this will only get me to 1.4x

magnification, but I thought this would be a quick solution since I

already have this equipment.

 

Also, what other solutions would people suggest. I understand close-

up lenses, but is there a simple way for me to get 2x magnification?

Extension tube? Which extension tube for this particular setup?

Thank you very much everybody. I contacted Stik Kim and he also recommended the Chungmuro area. He recommends World Photo rather than the Fuji film shop. I will check it out when I get there.

I will be travelling to Seoul soon. Does anybody know where I can

get decent, reliable processing of Fuji slide film (E6)? In

addition, quick turn around time would be ideal.

I just visited the Grand Canyon in April. I read the book "Death in the Canyon" on the plane ride over and decided not to hike to the bottom. I started out early in the morning, took some photographs of the sunrise, and started on my trek down the South Kaibab trail. I had a Lowepro mini-trekker loaded with my equipment, food, water, and a tripod. I spent a lot of time early in the morning setting up my tripod and taking fantastic pictures with Velvia. As the sun got higher, I switched to Provia and took fewer pictures.

 

As I hiked down it became clear to me that I was within striking distance of the river and decided "heck with it" let's go all the way. I reached the bottom around 11am, ate my lunch, and began the arduous trip back up the canyon taking the Bright Angel Trail. The trek back up was much more tiring and photography became less of a priority and survival moved up in priority. I was ready to ditch my tripod and simply buy a new one when I got to the top. I drank lots of water and finally made it to the top by 4:30pm. It was fun, but if I were to do it again, I would reserve a place at the lodge down by the river (Phantom Ranch) or plan to stay in a tent.

 

As for photographs I shot about five rolls of film. The best pictures were those shot within two hours of beginning my descent as the light was the best and I was focussed on photography and not on hiking.

 

I hope my experience helps.