bojan_steinb_cher

I did quite some scanning with 3200, both 120 and 35 formats. Don't expect too much from 135 scans, but 120 ones can be reasonably good.

Scans need agressive sharpening, even 500/1/1 in Photoshop isn't way out of line. Dinamic range limits its use with dense slides and there is no hardware dust correction.

It'd recomend getting Vuescan software and target slides from Wolf Faust, a good custom profile makes all the difference with this scanner.

best regards,

Miha

Thank you very much for your kind answers!

After the first roll of film,the lens seems to be surprisingly sharp even wide open and one with a pleasant bokeh.

Regards,

Bojan

I bought an almost mint Orestor f/2.8 135 mm in Exakta mount today.

Has any board member got any experience with the lens?

AF-D 18-35 is a fine piece of glass. It's sharp, contrasty, but suffers from distorsion at wide end. Don't use it for architecture (or learn to use PanoTools)!

As with all AF lenses, don't expect silky smooth manual focusing.

Regards,

Bojan

Epson 3200 can scan the complete negative, but unfortunately not in thumbnail mode. Switch to the (Normal?) mode and crop scan area manually.

The phenomena occurs in scanning just about everything, but it's very noticeable only with 35 mm film.

Regards,

Bojan

Get a copy of Panorama Tools!

Take a look at:

http://www.caldwellphotographic.com/TutorialsDistortionAndColorFringing.html

It isn't the most user friendly program under the sun, but does its job very well and it's free.

Regards,

Bojan

To everybody:

Thank you very much for your kind answers!

I'll most likely get a 18-35 3.5-4.5 AF-D. It's way more practical to zoom than to walk (and I'm getting older) and 18 mm is a real bonus. Flare and ghosting are my major concern, but i guess that's not a zoom only problem

To Kevin Finerty:

Unfortunately I can't snap one on at a store and take a peek. No store nearby has a 20 2.8 AF-D in stock and it isn't much better with 18-35 3.5-45.5 AF-D.

To Dave Schneider:

There're no levels on my tripod, but use one in camera's hotshue when needed. Most of the time I can get enough help from grid in F80's viewfinder.

To kl ix:

I wouldn't mind buying a used lens, but second hand market here is almost nonexistent and getting stuff across Atlantic ocean (and customs for that matter) would be highly unpractical.

To Steve Muntz and Lindsay Robb:

I share your concern on ghosting and flare. So far, it's my main argument pro 20 2.8 AF-D.

To Shun Cheung:

I'll probably go the way you suggest.

One more question. How effective is 18-35 lens hood (HB-23)?

Regards,

Bojan

Which wide angle AF lens should I get?

AF-S 17-35mm 2.8D unfortunately doesn't fit my budget too well. :-(

I'm torn between AF 20mm 2.8D and AF 18-35mm 3.5-4.5D. The first one

should be sharper and the second more versatile. I shoot predominantly

landscape, so lens speed isn't a major factor.

I'd like to have a lens wider than 24mm, my F80 can't meter with MF

lenses and used lenses marked here is hardly worth mentioning.

Regards,

Bojan

German magazine Color Foto compared variable apertures 28-80/100 zooms in it's last issue. They found Nikon second only to much more expensive Zeiss lens and way better than Canon which took the last place even after Sigma, Tamron and Tokina.

Their tests are often impractical, but they do give a hint.

I've got a 28-80 3.3-5.6D in kit with my F80 few years ago and wasn't disappointed. It's build quality isn't really great, it's slow (I'm mostly into landscapes, so it doesn't matter), quite prone to flare (get a lens hood!), but otherwise it serves me well.

It'd be wise to consider 50 1.8D as y

Regards,

Bojan

Thank you very much!

Bojan

After a hiatus of few decades I'm back into photography, doing mostly

digital.

Anyway, there're a lot of old B&W negatives, both 35 mm and 120 I

would like to bring into life. The problem is they are all neatly

rolled up. :-( What would be the best way to flatten them without

damage? Some seem quite brittle to me.

Regards,

Bojan

I wouldn't recomend Fuji NPC or Kodak Portra 400 UC for portraits. Try NPS or Portra NC instead.

The new NPH can be shot at 400 and it gives great results to me.

I'm pleased with Epson 3200 MF scans. It's surprisingly good in shadows, but it could be sharper though.

There's an interesting Epson Nikon comparison at http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/epson3200/

Regards,

Bojan

Thank you all!

I'm taking the camera to a repair shop next week and looking forward to take pics with it. First ones are going to be black and white, but I may later also try color.

To Ron Gratz:

Unfortunately there's no name and model number on the body under the handle. There's actually no leather there. Body is made of wood and metal.

The lenses are removable. They are made of 2 parts, one fits in front and other behind shutter.

Fuji's slide films (Velvia, Astia and Provia 100F) are in principle available in 9x12 cm in Europe, but must check with local dealers.

To Ralph Barker:

Camera appears in more or less fine condition, shutter seems to work OK, but can't fully extend the bellows to check it for light tightness. The rails stick, I guess that's work for a repair technician. :-(

Thank you for the link! There's much to learn, regardless of experience with 35 mm and medium format .

To Jim Galli:

I'm certainly going to try making pictures with it, selling was never an option. Thank you for the link!

Regards,

Bojan

Thank you all for your kind answers!

It was really clumsy of me asking for obvious things as I know the approximate age of the camera.

In fact I'm way more interested in practical value of the camera and lenses. Is it worth giving them a proper inspection/cleaning/repair? It looks good enough to put into a display cabinet, but is it sensible taking pictures with it? If so, should I limit myself to B&W?

Regards,

Bojan

I've inherited an old bellows camera and don't have much data on it.

Can somebody provide me with some info?

It's probably Zeiss Ikon Contessa, at least there's such inscription

on the body. The others are "Zeiss Icon" on top and "Compur" on the

bottom of shutter's face plate and "D.R.P. No 258646 D.R.G.M." around

lens mount.

There are two lenses, both made of two separate parts. The first one

is Carl Zeiss Jena Nr 721911 Tessar 1:4,5 f = 15 cm, the second is

Voigtlander Tele - Dynar 1: 6,5 F = 29 cm No 470027.

Aluminum ground glass holder has an opening of 11.6 X 8.5 cm. There're

several film holders.

Regards,

Bojan