RaymondC

After my digital Nikon D70, I have gone to a Nikon film SLR and shot Velvia, my last batch was using a USA shop for film and a USA lab while I live in New Zealand since it's so $$$ here. I am a saturation addict hence Velvia. I have also then gone and shot Velvia with medium format. For me it's a bitter pill to swallow b/c slides are so $$ and it's tiresome to collect up my film for 2yrs before I send them to the USA as a single batch. Which i something I have done for a couple of years now. While I probably will shoot some slides in a occasionally it would be a lot lower than the past. Speaking of myself I would get a Nikon Z system if you are going with the Nikon brand. If you want something cheaper and not so concerned about the future then maybe a dSLR. As said I am a saturation addict with patience maybe I will hunt out those surreal sun shots and shoot Velvia. With digital you can shoot at more hours b/c it has more dynamic range, you don't have to scan or purchase a scanner or pay someone else to do it.

I have noticed that film gear equip are slowly going up in prices. What do you think will happen in the 5-10yrs time? Would it go up or would it start to fall back down? I shoot film gear occasionally and it's great that I can now afford to shoot esp the medium format gear, but I do shoot most with digital cameras. Not relating to the very sought after Hasselblad XPAN, or Mamiya 6 and 7's are crazy but just your modest RB67, 645 or Hassie body with a average lens or two kinda thing. Cheers.

May this year 2019 I spent $230US + $65US abouts for delivery. Pro SD body with a WLF and a film back. Really good condition including the bellows. I see that things have gotten more $$ now. Seems to be around $380US now with delivery. I just thought a otherwise working original version RB67 is a waste just sitting there or thrown away or sold for parts. I got some bellows and I will ask the repair person to install them ... I might ask him to check both bodies to fine tune the focus also. Sadly it's not a local guy, it's a 50min flight away. Edit - I find the cheaper ones actually need bellow replacements eventually but I find to get one that does not need it the Pro SD generally have less wear and tear. Some of the cheaper Pro SD models have more wear and tear so they stand very little difference to the Pro S model but the Pro SD is still a newer one.

Never when I am just out and about. The exception is maybe over the warmer months and we head out for lunch and we go for a walk and I take some quick shots with my camera maybe a Nikon FM2N because it is compact or a Fuji XT1 that means your definition right - real honest to goodness. Others times I might just carry a Ricoh GR which isn't a real honest to goodness. A lot of time when I do go with my camera it is going out just for photography, not while I am doing other stuff.

I have a Mamiya RB67 original model. I guess I got it cheap, I got 2yrs out of it before the holes developed in the bellows and gotten larger, before that I also got some seawater into the focus screen so while it is workable it's not in the best condition. So I looked at getting it repaired, $80US for bellow replacements and then possibly $40US to have this installed for me? There is a older guy who has been doing this for some decades. It just doesn't really make sense when you can pick up the latest much newer RB67 Pro SD model with the focus screen in very much excellent condition for maybe $180US ...... Cheers. Edit. I have debated with myself that at least I have a working camera but for $40US more I could have a much newer body and the focus screen isn't affected with salt water and it does not have those rust spots on the metal body. Plus the original model does not have as much interlocks, forget to remove the dark slide - BAM! forget to crank the film mag - BAM! Even if I just buy another Pro SD body and have it sit on my shelf, it will just cost $40US more than having the old one repaired.

I didn't mean a serious photographer was one that produced more better photographs. At my camera club, for sure, we have had competitions where some people have used a Nikon D3000 series body and a kit lens. I mean some people are more open in spending more money because that is what they enjoy with their photography. Maybe call it more interested in photography technology and gear. Usually I like to relate to photography as a requirement than just wanting more nice stuff. For normal people, they might take pictures at a park, at the beach, kids at the soccer field, also they might go on a family vacation go outside on a blue sky day - that's fine. However they also spend time indoor at a mall or at a cafe where the ambient light might be darker. They might go to the waterfront at night and watch the laser night show or visit a night market. The Z50 with the kit lens might not be suitable for that. They might be invited to someone's wedding where it is also darker and there is the dance floor. Not being the wedding photographer but just some casual snaps by a attendee, maybe not so much photos of the bride and groom perhaps just some photos around their own table which they got to enjoy the evening with. Seems less worth it for a DX shooter right? That is someone who might not see FX as something they want to get into.

I mean they need to be quite into their hobby and wanting to spend a good deal of money. Like a number of people here that takes their hobby quite seriously they also put decent dent into their purse or wallet. I wasn't relating to wildlife or sports because that is a specific type of photography or specialisation. The Z50 doesn't cost $400US and should they get any more lenses because there isn't a heck of a lot of DX lenses they might be spending more money into FX lenses and maybe want to leave the door open and get a FX body as well which again cost more money. With the camera club I belong to. A number of them only use DX kit lenses but there are the ones that have pro zooms who spend more serious money into it and maybe a higher model camera body also.

Elaborate.... I was thinking yea for someone as a newbie into photography is the Z50 for them? ML DX doesn't have much lenses available and unless they do something different like their dSLRs, Nikon is focussed with FX. As a newbie, as a hobbyist who isn't going to spend a load of money into photography, like many people honesty - is the Z50 a viable option? Or is the Z50 more for someone who is already a Nikon user or looking at FX at some stage and the Z50 can be a light weight body on travel etc ..? Yeah sure about reach and stuff but I was looking at a more general photography hobbyist as in the DX ML being their 1 single main camera, walk about style which is again what the majority hobbyist does. Average Joe / Jane.

Is it for those who have already invested at least semi substantially in the Nikon brand? At the camera club we did a public exhibition, everyone got a print on the wall. Most of the images were not low light, action or especially creative with the f-stop. With people they shot them mostly in the day time, not the unsocial hours. The prints on the wall printed about 12x18 inches most could had been done with kit leneses. There are also club members who really only have 2 kit lenses with their dSLRs or 1 kit and 1 other lens. Many of the cameras were more the entry level dSLRs, some are still using dSLRs because going to mirrorless does take a bit of investment. Over the last 4 or 5 yrs some have made the move to ML but not everyone, most have done so with Fuji and Olympus and those have more serious gear like a D800 or a 5D user might had went with a Sony FF ML. Some are also using a FF dSLR ie a previous 1 or 2 generation and haven't made the switch. The min being the Z50 in the Nikon ML camp. You have to be quite serious to get into right?

Much of the savings is negated because a roll of slide film cost more then color neg. Over here also one roll of 35mm slide film cost $30US. Hence I buy my film from overseas. Also these days, maybe in the past labs were better than now, not sure because I got into photography in 2004 with a dSLR and before that just a 1999/2000 model entry model Canon film SLR that the family had with the one kit lens. Yeah .. these days, I just find it better colors that I scan my own film even with a flatbed compared to a minilab machine they use. Actually C41 is cheaper. E6 - develop and sleeve cost $20US here in NZ. C41 develop and sleeve cost $7US C41 develop and 1x set or prints 6x4 $14US. E6 roll of film 35mm up to $30US, a roll of C41 like Kodak Portra cost $10-12US.

I have found a place to get E6 chemistry. Not sure if for me it is worthwhile thou. $32US for a 1 quart kit + $66US for the shipping. It is the same for me as now I shoot and store in freezer until I have a batch and send them to a USA lab, if I were to DIY I would do the same b/c colour chemistry don't last long. What it basically mean is that I need to shoot 20 rolls of slide film in the year or a single go with that kit before it is worthwhile. If I only shot 10 rolls, the USA lab is $20US more dearer which is the the same basically (this includes my $50US return freight of the film). This 20 rolls figure is what people have done, if I adhere to the manufacturer they say max 8 rolls for the 1 quart. Unless I was one of those who shot 20 rolls a year every year then it would be worth it, I could then purchase 3 kits and save a bit on the freight or if I happen to shoot 50 or 100 rolls a year. For me too :) I have to be in a position where it's worth it spending such money on slide film which is more $$ than color neg. Esp at home, if I am at home doing the same thing over and over again then what's the point. Sure I could just walk down to my local beach after a lunch or a brunch but would I shoot some very average scenery that doesn't move me with slide film. Also the fact slide film are really just ISO 50 and 100. One could push slide film but the lab will cost you more for that also and it would bring the grain out a bit more and it still won't be really high ISO.

I bundle them up and send to the USA because the local NZ labs charge $20US equiv per roll of E6 developed, no mounting, hasn't been available for over 10yrs. When it was available, on top of the $20USD processing, they charged 20c USD per slide mounted times 36 if if you wanted everything mounted at the time of processing. There is 1 lab that does E6 in the capital city and maybe 2 elsewhere in the country. I also import my film from the USA because C41 Kodak Portra cost prob 2x to the USA. A roll of 135mm format Velvia like you noted, here it cost $30USD.

I use mainly Velvia also mainly in 120 format. Maybe I am a saturation addict. I also chase sunrise forecast when I can. I also have shot BW with DIY processing at home with just the Paterson tank, no darkroom. I do have a changing bag that I got for free at the camera club. Still prefer slides. For the min rolls of BW I use the Ilford powder developer since mixes 1L only. On a wide scale. It seems that some of us get into our hobby, spend all these money that most people have little interests for. I get that we might be on a family vacation but for real photog, it's time to ourselves so the group splits up or we do trips by ourselves and travelling to another region or country alone just for photography? Most people may look at us strangely. Most people are not going to be interested in waiting for you and your camera, going to the outdoors, going out in the unsocial times for landscape photog. Then when you have made the print, they look at it for 5sec and that's it.

I am sure there are those hardcore slide shooters out there, after all there are still sheet film available. Maybe more for those that are more open minded, they shoot digital and film. How many rolls of slide do you do a year and are you very careful when you shoot? For me, I do most of my film with medium format now. I occasionally get given 35mm BW film which I shoot with my Nikon FM and DIY processing at home. Sadly here in New Zealand, we cannot get colour chemistry. I go thru maybe 10 rolls of slides a year and another 10 rolls of BW per year. For several years, I have also had to import my film from the USA cos you guys have very favourable $10US freight cost and then I export back to you guys for the lab work. I no longer have anymore slides, I don't think I will get rid of it but I may be shooting less. Over here if I did everything local, the roll cost $12US and the lab cost another $20US - medium format. 10 rolls even going with USA prices that's $200US. I've never spent much time with C41, so trying that out, ordered only 4 rolls of Portra and no, I didn't order any more slides. Cheers. Edit - 35mm slides here cost $30US which is a lot more than the USA. Fortunately 120 slides are $12US. Labs still charge $20US regardless of format.

They may still prioritise their cameras to FX. Encouraging Z DX users to FX. I had a quick look at the roadmap and there wasn't really much DX Z lenses for ther dedicated DX shooter. Like the dSLRs, the 17-5mm 2.8 didn't get updated, there was also no DX wide angle primes and anthing more than 50mm they had to purchase FX to use on DX. It may not be a portable smaller sleek DX system for say street photography or that serious family guy on vacation who prefer not to purchase and carry FX.

Hi all I tend to use mostly ID-11. Out of interest what is the advantage of Microphen? I know that it is said to be for pushing film. When film is pushed does it give lesser grain compared to ID-11? With Ilford's documents Microphen is listed as a recipe when you push HP5+ to 3200 but it is not listed for ID-11. When pushed to 1600 both ID-11 and Microphen list development times what is the difference between the two developers? Cheers.

Oh I see, so with Apple you don't have Epson Scan software?

In all practical purposes just crop in photo editing software then. The Epson software and others allow you to auto select the frame yep. In the preview Window it is called "thumbnails", does not always work though but it is a automatic huge time saver. When it doesn't work I need to manually draw the marque square for the first frame, then hit duplicate and move the square to the 2nd frame, the 3rd, the 4th, the 5th .... the 24th and then select all and hit scan. Time consuming yes ...

As others have mentioned there are better scanners given your quality needs. However even 10 or 20yrs ago, while dedicated were available in stores to purchase. Most of the high street film digitising services were not using dedicated quality scanners. They were available but many were more specialised outlets. Like now many places provide film scanning thru their Fuji Frontier machines. If you don't want the round black border frame - using the Epson software under Preview Window - Normal. Draw your own marque square around the frame of the photo. You can also press the zoom button to assist you.

If a Epson flatbed scanner isn't up to the job then you need to go and use a dedicated film scanner, a digital camera or outsource the job. Like someone else said it is going to be a big job and not cheap. One way or another, either you get the equipment and DIY or you get some other firm / someone to do it with equipment that yields the quality you are after. In terms of the date etc .. you can use a EXIFTOOL editor which you can add in things like date, time, camera brand and model and batch it so it is automatic for the entire roll. I do that to a roll of film and put them in sequence 1 to 36 with a date and time and then each photo is like 1min later than the photo before.

JDWvW - thanks for the article. It makes sense. The article exposes the sky as it is and then makes the foreground 1 stop darker. Originally a 3 stop grad became a 2 stop grad. Any other views on how you guys tackle this? Making the sky 1 stop brighter than a metered foreground wouldn't be as nice right ...

Occasionally for enjoyment I shoot some landscapes with Fuji Velvia (sunsets). Situation: I spot meter the sky and the foreground (with adjustment), I found there was a 4 stop difference. I only have a max 3 stop grad filter. Because slide film is said to have 2 stops from midtone to the highlights and 2 stops from midtone to the shadow. Am I safe to assume that the dynamic range of the film would be OK in this situation? Thanks.

Hassie film gear are all on the used market now. I have a 500CM I don't care about insuring it. Your high end phone would cost more than a used (market value) Hassie. Is the insurance company gonna pay you on market value or on agreed value? Here in New Zealand our film cameras are worth a bit less than the USA. I got my in the USA at KEH for about $1200US 500CM with one back and 80mm lens and the WLF. In NZ they go for maybe $1,000US, the other day I saw a 503CX went for $1,200US with the 80mm and one back and WLF. Even used Hasselblad H3D with a 30 odd MP back and a zoom lens goes for $3,000US and each time no buyers. Equally Mamiya 645AF with 3 lenses failed to sell for $1,800US which is with the ZD back.

Who has access to these cinema scanners? Only the larger countries? Expensive? How available and convenient to customers / hobbyists?

I came upon a newsletter that they are discontinued and B&H list them as such too. Does that leave film photography with b/w film? Give it several year like Nikon, Hasselblad might state there are no longer parts and servicing are no longer provided other than a CLA. Over the years more and more labs will no longer have Hasselblad scanners, drum scanners I believe are also no longer officially supported. Over the years also those who still repair Nikon, Hasselblad scanners unofficially more of them would start to retire. Your thoughts?