perry_cas

I recently dropped my Minolta F spot. I still have a gossen profi 6 analogue

with a spot attachment. But it's too bulky. I'd like a replacement that will do

reflected, incident, flash and (5 deg?)spot with an attachment. Preferably not

too expensive There are a few I have looked at

Minolta auto 111 that will more or less do it but it looks a bit bulky,

gossen Luna star F looks about the right size and not too expensive and the

Sekonic L558.

Any comments or complaints, or for that matter recommmendations?

Perry

http://66.49.230.119/minolta_pdf/minolta_autometer_iii.pdf

I very recently purchased one of these and am a bit confused about a couple of

things. Gaoersi havent been forward about answering my mails.

 

With the camera I got two pieces of black metal, felt backed. I am sort of

assuming they have something to do with the film counter window, but what?

The film counter window from the outside actually reads backward with the 612 on

the Right (starboard) side of the camera back, now I think this is wrong. I

think it should read the other way and i think the 612 mark should be over

towards the winder.

I just had a look at their page on adjusting/calibrating the focusing mechanism.

Its wonderful. They show a very technically complex procedure - using a pair of

scissors.

Comments or experiences with this camera happily appreciated.

Perry

I have an embarrassing question, I dont know how to ID the size of my shutter.

Its in use with a 65mm Linhof select Schneider K F8, the only thing it says on

the shutter is 'Linhof'. The board hole is 25mm, the overall shutter dia is

46mm and the depth is 19mm. Would this be a '0' or an '00'? Or is there more

info required?

Thanks

Perry<div></div>

thanks for this. SF seem to have been a bit inconsistent in the matter of upgrades/change overs. I had an E3200 when i first bought SF. When I bought a 4990 about a year or so later they very kindly gave me another Serial No. After extensive emailing I gather that this no longer takes place. Yes i might download the demo I hadnt thought of it (duuH) but as i plan to replace this machine some time next year with the new model that some where talking about just released in Japan, I have been leaning towards waiting.

Vuescan. I am a little surprised Stephane that you say its hard to learn. I always understood that it was sort of like: Vuescan to SF was like Elements to Ps? A simplified program. I shall have a look at it.

Thanks.

Thank you all for your input.

Perry

I wonder if anyone has a comment about this combination. I am about to upgrade

my v 6 to 6.5, but am considering the Multi scan function available with Studio,

but not sure how effective it is with the 4990. I will replace this machine with

the new model sometime next year, so not sure if its worth buying Ai Studio now.

Thanks

Yes all this makes sense. I did wonder about in camera sharps and while messing about I found that the Raw really did like to be sharpened a LOT more than i would normally use. The triangulation error, Ah. I was wondering if my technique was correct, thanks El Fang, you describe exactly what i was doing. I did notice that moveable option, shall have to look to see if its available in other than macro.

I havent bothered looking at the jpeg settings as i really am most concerned with RAW.

In PS I am using US mask at about 100%sharp, 1.7 rad and a threshold of 12. This is around my normal settings but I am finding I have to increase this to up to double.

Yes am aware of res - screen res versus print as I have found that this differs greatly. I shall get to a print soon to test.

Thanks for your advice, much appreciated.

Perry

This is my first digital camera.

I have passing understanding of using RAW format only.

I bought the gx100 a couple of weeks ago and have had a few issues with it that

may be my ignorance and may be an issue with the camera.

- It's focusing is a bit unimpressive compared to my film cameras. Even possibly

compared to my wife's 3.2 canon.

I noticed initially that its ability to record fine detail was a bit

disappointing. I have only used the auto focus function at this point. What i am

noticing is that perhaps the area of focus is just too big, so for instance I

was testing on a flower using the the bracket in the centre of the camera, and I

have selected AF SPOT in the options, and still on a 100% crop at about 2' away

the resulting detail is poor. I am shooting in RAW.

In fact other parts of the pic seem better focussed. To clarify: trying to focus

on fine detail the camera seems to be insisting on focusing more on the background.

 

When i down load the images to look at them I notice that the jpeg ver is

actually better than the RAW. Even after I have sharpened the RAW image (in CS3)

it still seems less good than the unedited jpeg

Does this sound correct? Am I expecting the wrong thing? Do I need to to

process the raw image further to optimize? Am I missing something ? Camera fault?

Input appreciated

Perry

hope someone is still looking here. I went out and bought the gx, a question pls. Will the class of sd card used make a difference with this camera?

Yes I was wondering about this. Mainly I use reala.I hadnt picked that diference up.

I am trying to sort out as painless a way of improving my scans as possible.

Whats the difference between the Silverfast IT8 calibration and the Monaco EZ

colour? I have been using AI for some time, I am tempted to just update to the

new ver that has it8, or perhaps the studio, but i notice that Epson ( I have a

4990) are bundling the monaco with the 750 AND the AI. Seems to be similar with

the new one on sale in Japan. SO confused I am.

Perry

Yes i realize its going to be a bit tricky getting much feedback on the fz18 as its pretty new, but would assume its picture quality to be on par with the FZ50. May I ask Mitch how the print quality of your FZ compares to that of your GX100.And I also have little neeed for a length of that type, in the past i had some longish lenses and rarely got over 100mm. I was concerned about the trade in bulk and that extra length of the FZ's lense. The price of the FZ and its Leica lense look attractive but that extra length (420 I think, and i ask what for?)worries me. Are you saying that the lense on the FZ is better than the Ricoh? I agree the 35mm is a bit limiting and i do like 24.

 

I shall read the link you sent.

 

I just ran a search on the G9. Looks very interesting G9. I have also been wondering about the awaited Sigma Dp1.

 

Thanks gents.Information is much appreciated and I did enjoy your BW tokyo fish market series Mitch. I did a similar series in a fishmarket on an island in Indonesia with a Rollei sl66 a few years ago, not as contrasty as yours and i like the low angle shots you were able to do. Some nice composition too, I do think that a small camera can be a real plus in the area of composition. They are just physically easier to 'manage'.

P

IN relation to the lens, I have been pretty unimpressed in the past with long-ish film camera zooms - say in the 28-200 bracket. I haven't owned a super zoom but am considering this camera for the good things that i hear of its lense. There have to be shortcomings in a range this big, I assume, and i wonder just where they are?

Perry

Actually am enjoying the discussion, pls dont get messed up the difference between LF and GX100 performance, I am staying with LF for what i like using it for - landscape - and wanting a digital camera to 'blast away' with, at something like 35mm film quality. Stress the 'something like'. The Ricoh looks like what i want, and I'm not too troubled by the High noise factor at High ASA's.

 

Original post was wondering if the price of the two which is similar, might suggest a bit more flexibility with the Lumix and whether there were any opinions about the relative qualities of the lenses. I believe the Lumix lense is pretty good, but as I said I have a mortal fear of long zooms and am not experienced enough with digitals to know if this fear is still justified.

P

I've been a film user until now. I am most interested in wide MF format. BUT/AND

I want a light weight camera to take OTHER sorts of pics that i can carry with

me sometimes when i am luggng my LF camera about or even just on its own. And am

about to divest my self of my M6 outfit. It's too heavy for me to carry

everything when i travel.

I am attracted to the Ricoh for the things that it does well, size, raw format,

24mm and the viewfinder (even tho the quality of this latter is somewhat

questionable), and a short zoom range. But then I know little of its glass.

The Lumix has a pretty good chunk of glass on the front of it, but then I have

long been suspicious of Zooms this long, and doubt i am interested in its huge

length. They are of comparable price so I am wondering if it might not be a bit

more versatile, or whether image quality will suffer from that rather long zoom.

I guess I am asking for some input having looked at the two and their specs, and

have handled both of thembut without extensive experience of either I am really

not sure. Comments appreciated so I am gong to post this in the Ricoh and the

Pany forums.

I was talking to my service guy yesterday about the counters on the Fuji. he says they can be reset, giving an inaccurate view of age and use. He also says that there are no parts available. I am still interested in a 690 with a 65mm. Any Comments?

Which Lense? I am quite curious about the fuji 6x9 esp the 65mm. I noticed a few minutes ago that someone was talking about interchangeable lenses? I thought they were fixed. Part of the reason I have become interested is that i have just got back from C java, humping 10kgs of backpack up and down mtns with my Crown Graphic. Wanna see big?<div></div>

I am passing through Singapore next month and wonder if anyone can recommend a

place that sells and processes film there. Fuji or Kodak MF

Thanks

Perry

thanks I appreciate the suggestion re Xray warning. I had a really bad experience in Hungary a few years ago where the staff actually tried to wrestle me for the film so that they could Xray it. they were much more civilised at the other end in Syria, where i ended up having a surprising conversation with the head of security about post war absurdism and the plays of Harold Pinter in relation to the Hungarian farce. NPS? You might be in for a pleasant surprise with Reala Doug, NPS is a really a Portrait film, VERY soft on wrinkles, not really useful for landscape details.

I dont think I have tried NPH, but I really what i wanted to know was how the Portra 160 compared to the Reala as an outdoor landscape film. If it was as fine grained.

Thanks for the help

Perry

I quite like Reala but it doesnt seem to come in a 220. I was wondering what the

alternatives might be, Portra 160 NC? I am about to go on a trip to the tropics.

Any suggestions would be valued.

perry

I kind of went down this road not long ago, but my parameters were of price: how much do I have to spend to get the equivalent of a good MF in a digital camera? The answer was 'rather a lot of money'. About 20+K aud. L1 EOS etc.

Unless you have this highly desirable state of affairs you have to start making your own compromises with scanners. From the reviews i have read the v700/750 looks like a pretty fair place to start.

I am listed as on holidays but the alerts are still filling up my mailbox. The

other option is to delete my account. I dont really want to do this but I would

like to stop the 30 alert messages coming through every day.

Suggest you have a look at alternative software. I use silver scan, I think it's streets ahead of the Epson. A lot of people like Vuescan. I don't know a lot of this but i do know that the SS is a bit faster than the E software. A lot more convenient too. Worth the $$$

P

I had a 3200 I beleive they had quality control issues with it - mine was a dog. I replaced it with the 4990. I have been very happy with it. The review on I-chat of the 700 is pretty interesting and i doubt that there will be many more improvements as digital really has gotten big enough to chew out the money for r&d on scanners.

I dont see how you are getting any sort of results the way you are doing it as the point of focus is .5 (correct me if I am wrong )above the glass.

you could buy a wet scan kit from scanmax, that would do it. I use one and it really is a very good method of obtaining flat film.

I wouldnt recommend the 4990. If you are going up, go for the v700, there are good deals out there I have seen them gong on Ebay for the same price as new 4990s.

Look, thanks for the suggestion, but I can't say i agree with you. I have a really bad dust environment. ICE has performed just fine for me for the past 2 yrs. 'Something' has just happened. I am suspecting a build up of humidity in the machine itself leaving a residue on the glass. I spoke to a techy today who said he thought that he might have had a similar problem and that it was a fault in the glass. Seems a bit unlikely.

 

'Raise the humidity to 45%!'

 

Indeed!Its normally 65% + here. I never noticed that humidity kept dust down.

Removing dust post scan is not a good option, I have done it in the past. Time goes by. In LARGE quantities.And this includes taking care that the neg and the glass are as clean as 'possible'

 

Thanks for the suggestion Patrick