nikos peri

"Unless you have some problem with your MF equipment, I see no reason to switch to LF, which is by comparison a PITA to use."<p>

That's to say that having the advantages of swings, tilt, rise to control perspective and plane of focus can be thrown out the window as a PITA?!?! Of course, why would you want an immensely larger negative either, or the benefit low enlargement factors (if any!).<p>

The problem the OP has is that he wants foreground/background landscape to be in the plane of focus; having tilt is exactly what the doctor ordered.

In case you haven't already seen this, it's a very good starting place;<p>

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/

DOF will be less with a larger format as Robert said, but with movements, you can choose

where to place the plane of focus, unlike fixed lens/film plane cameras. Search for the

Scheimpflug rule for your question on getting the plane of focus (as opposed to DOF) where

you get a receding landscape in focus.

What film do you shoot? If it's B&W, a one-stop is a waste IMO as it's just easier to burn in one stop on a sky under the enlarger. Personally, I would even say if you only have one filter, get the two stop - even for chromes.<p>

For ease, get the B60 to 67mm step-up ring, and then you can use plain-Jane 67mm screw-in filters. Of course, I prefer being able to place my horizon with ND grads, but you seem to have already made that decision; favoring simplicity. Careful though, you may get some vignetting...

I haven't personally used it, but a fellow photographer uses it on his D2x to shoot sports. For

once, I am on the other end of the glass, so he gives me the whole sequence (about 200

shots). The hit rate is amazing with that lens - every shot is bang on focus, crisp and good

contrast. He doesn't rework them as 1) I'm not buying them and 2) 200 shots to rework for

one skier; I think not.<p>

FWIW, he is getting great results with that lens on his D2x - and I'm comparing to my shots

with the 300mm f/2.8 Nikkor on my D2x.<div></div>

Hmmm... <br>

Sinar F2 - Schneider APO Symmar 210mm<br>

Polaroid 545 Pro back - Polaroid Type 52<br>

Multiblitz 600W/s monobloc<br>

Airwick Air freshener (they're old boots)<div></div>

Can't help with most of that thread except to remind you or Mr Murphy: sync cords WILL fail and/or disappear only during a paying gig. Always bring a spare cord or three.<p>

Also, I believe you can use the D200 as a commander for the SB800 without any cord at all.

You can get most any decent eq mount independantly from the optical tube you place on it. I have a Vixen setup, where the accessory plate is nothing other than a plate that connects to the eq mount via the standard v-tail. The plate itself is usually used to hold rings to hold a refractor, but it is covered in standard Kodak thread screws (6). These you can use to hold the camera through the tripod socket (bad idea though), or the lens through its own lens collar (much better idea).<p>

Bear in mind though, that if you intend on achieving accurate polar alignment, you will need the ability to use your 1000mm lens with an illuminated reticle eyepiece.

Dear photo.net<br>

I am the very happy owner of a second hand Imacon Flextight 646 which I found way out in California and

brought back to Italy and have been happily scanning away since. However, now the scanner is loudly

telling me that I need to send it in for preventive maintenance - which I believe is after a year has passed

or a certain number of scans, whichever comes first.<br>

However, since Imacon/Hasselblad started restructuring their after sales network quite a few years ago,

many service centers closed. The Hasselblad website section for Imacon maintenance centers has been

"Under Construction" for months now. Furthermore, sending this monolith of a scanner packaged

anywhere is a very large shipment.<p>

So the question is, can anyone share their preventive maintenance experience? What does it entail, does it

improve scans, is it worth the hassle. And above all, where in Hassie-land did you get it done?! Shipping

that monster off once a year for it to receive a wipe-down with an anti-static cloth, I can do myself.

Given that your camera uses "through the lens" metering, you can slap the filter on the lens, and meter and shoot just as you had before.<p>

Nonetheless, for the sake of discussion... If 1/60 @ f/8 unfiltered and a 4x filter factor, you could use 1/60 @ f/4, or 1/15 @ f/8, or anything in between. Changing you shutter speed will risk motion blur, changing your aperture will risk DOF issues. <p>

You could also try tungsten-balanced film.

Looks like you're catching the shadow of a lens-hood, visible only when you use the wide-

angle at the widest. Guessing, as I am not familiar with your camera.

That's an application of the sunny-16 rule; i.e. for full sunlight, f/16 and 1/ISO. A full moon

is after all nothing other than an object in full sunlight. Naturally, under an eclipse, or with

less than full moon, that vary. Bracketing is a very good idea - and anything except a spot

meter reading will do you no good as the surrounding darkness will lead to massive massive

over exposure.

Depends on number of films, type of films, type of fixer...<p>

Use a leader and do a clearing time test. Fix for twice (or 3x) that. If fixing time is beyond 5

minutes, throw fixer out.<br>

T-grain films will consume fixer faster that trad B&W films<br>

Time is rarely an issue - if it has been hanging around too long, it will crystalize, with some

parts coming out of solution - but I've had fix keep 4-6 months and still clear in 90 seconds.

Like this perhaps? I forgot to mention that overexposing a very bright area will bring this

effect out even more.<div></div>