erikj

I haven't used photo.net in a while and they moved everything on me.

Thanks for any help!

Erik

Everyone is sold out... Ritz has it for $50 and $16 shipping. I dont want to

spend $70 for a BATTERY!

I ALWAYS throw out instructions. Especially if there's something written on them that I need to read. Besides, you guys are SOOOO knowledgable, theres no need to keep instructions.

So thats for the "print" obviously and the negative needs that whole other PITA process, ya?

Thanks. You guys are the best ever.

I'm about to use it for the 1st time... I'm gonna shoot a box and

leave it unprocessed until I have the perfect set up to mess with it

at home. I opened up the box to get the film and these crazy little

tubes were in there. Whats the dealio?

I have tried the Epson 4870 briefly and I think the results are OK. I would like to see

comparison scans from the MicroTek 1800, the Nikon 8000 or 9000 and any other

comparable film or film/flatbed scanners.

I have seen the photo-i site and it is pretty good for what they have reviewed, which is not

a lot.

Thanks.

The MicroTek 1800f film scanner sounds interesting. I checked it out on the MicroTek site

and it looks like a film/flatbed scanner. It is twice the cost, but if the scans are

dramatically better, it might be worth it. B&H has it for $899. I am going to look into it.

I already asked this, but is there a good scanner review site or magazine, etc?

Thanks.

I have been using my Fuji S2 more than I should be. I usually do a fair amount of

Photoshop work on my images, but I want to get back into using film. I want to scan and

print images on my Epson 2200, or use them in print design (I am a graphic designer as

well). I will be using 6x6 and 4x5. Is there a film scanner that is reasonably priced that

does 4x5? I know I can get the Nikon 9000 for around $2000 or so for the 6x6.

Are there any other scanners in general that I should be thinking of? Does anyone know of

a good site to see scanner reviews?

Thanks!

I always shoot RAW and always have to adjust the resulting image. The images usually

come out slightly soft, desaturated and flat. You could probably set up a standard action

in Photoshop to bring the image closer to what you want. I find myself saturating images

about 10% and then bumping up the contrast about the same amount, and then

sharpening the image a bit. Then I start with the burning/dodging etc.

I would assume that the D2X is going to be superior in almost every aspect, but it will

probably be almost twice the cost (I've heard $3000 and $5500). The bodies that these

cameras are based on will have the biggest effect on the AF and motors, etc. The D2X also

has a slightly larger sensor, which means slightly larger view area.

I have the S2, and it is a great camera. The image quality is awesome. Have you looked at

the dpreview.com reviews? They have a lot of good info there and you can see test images.

The S2 syncs at 1/125, the S3 will be 1/180. Neither are for high speed work, but the S2 is

perfect for studio stuff. I think the D70 might be a better value though. It has a good

image and a better feature set than the S2. Either way, you will be happy. I am probably

going to spring for the S3 if it lives up to the hype. The projected price is $3000 though.

Ouch. The sync plug was very nice, but I just got Pocket Wizard stuff a couple of weeks

ago and I am not using sync cords anymore, so that is not an issue for me personally.

I have this camera and I cannot find the manual right now. Does anyone know how to do

the custom w/b?

Thanks.

Whether or not I use it at 1.8, it is a good bit faster. I usually use most lenses at f/5.6-11

anyway. especially with a wide angle as you point out, because of the edge to edge

sharpness factor. It's really the aspherical factor that interests me.

I think that the changes might not be enought for the rumored $3000 pricepoint.

I love my S2, I did comparisons and looked at all of the features and sample images on

dpreview, and I feel no regrets to getting it over the competition. I would have a real

struggle trying to decide between the $1000 D70 and the $2000 S2, though. At twice

the price, the slightly better image quality just isnt worth it, especially when you look at all

of the other benefits the D70 has, like a 1/500 flash sync, 1/3 stop EV, 3fps, 1/8000 max

shutter speed, vertical orientation sensor, and better image than the D100.

If the S3 was $2000 or less, I would seriously consider selling my S2 for it, and also,

wouldn't hesitate to buy it over the D70, assuming the images are better than the S2.

The Sigma lens is faster, it says it is aspherical (which the Nikon isn't), it's less

expensive....

Does anyone have experience with both? Or have an idea where I can go to see test shots?

Thanks.