patric_parker1

<p>Thanks again to everyone for the advice. All told, I may just take the Red River conclusions and call it a day! </p>

<p>Thanks everyone for the lightning fast reply - great information.</p>

<p>My "test" was not perfect. I was planning on identical sizes similar subjects, but I realize unless they are identical photos each one takes a different amount of ink. The subjects (graffiti paintings) are similar in color schemes.</p>

<p>I didn't hit on my search for similar calculations, but I'll try again.</p>

<p>Thanks again!</p>

<p>I have an Epson 3800. I want to experiment on ink and paper costs in advance of a run printing a few particular images. My existing cartridges range from almost empty to almost full. I would like to remove them, install a full set of new cartridges, print them until they run dry (to calculate the cost per print). I would then re-install my existing partially used cartridges.</p>

<p>Will I be able to reinstall the old cartridges?</p>

<p>Thanks for your help!</p>

<p>I have (and use) the 18-200, as well as some "better" glass like the 80-200mm 2.8 and the 35-70mm 2.8. While I like the faster zooms, and think i can get somewhat superior photos with them given a little time, when I am wandering around with my wife, or on vacation with the family, the 18-200 is perfect. The photos are not point and shoot quality (selective focus is easilty possible), but the convenience is point and shoot like. A great lens.</p>

<p>I have been using a 3170 for several years to scan MF b&w negatives and color 35mm slides. I understand the limits of the scanner and the old Epson software. Last week, I thought I had broken the 3170, so I started to read up on the newer models. I was ready to buy the V600 when the 3170 began to work again (operator error, I'm sure). Now I'm wondering how much of an improvement the V600 is, since it is already in my "cart" at B & H. Any opinions would be appreciated.</p>

<p>Thanks, everyone for your advice. Glad to hear no particular warnings about the older design pro lenses. My other cameras are a 20 year old Hasselblad (with even older lenses) and a 40 year old Rolleflex - I'm not afraid of older equipment.</p>

<p>Like most of us, I started shooting digital a few years ago, after being a film guy for years. I now use a D200, and I’m on a lens hunt.

<p>I have several primes (50 1.8, 35 1.4, 24 2.8), and several zooms (80-200 2.8D, 18-200 DX, Sigma 10 - 20). From my film experience up until now, my 80-200 has always been my big dog. The shots are just snappier, sharper, and I love the 2.8 for background blur. As soon as I bought this lens, I became a believer that good glass trumps good camera.<br>

I am looking at used pro zooms, specifically the 20-35 2.8D and the 35-70 2.8. My thought is that the Nikon pro lenses are where the pop is, and these were the trio with my 80-200 a few years back. And someday I expect to go FX, though it will be a while, so it seems like if I am looking for more "pro" glass, I should go full frame glass.<br>

But I see postings saying that the "old" Nikons are not optimized for digital, and perform badly. Not my experience with the 80-200, but I am looking for more expert opinions.</p>

</p>

I can tell you that I used an 80-200 2.8D (not push pull, not AF-S) for my kids through middle school, high school and college. First on film with the N70 (?), then the D70. I shot football, basketball, volleyball, marching band, often with a monopod. The lens, camera and monopod combination is awesome, and the memories are priceless. Sports need zooms. Sports need 2.8. Yes, the autofocus wasn't blazing, but you learn to correct. Almost all of my best memories are with this lens.

 

My kids are grown, and I miss shooting sports. Last month I shot a cross country meet with this lens for a friend, and got great shots of his son in the lead pack. There were tears in the eyes of my buddy when I gave him the pictures. This is a great lens. For real world amatuers, this is where serious photos begin.

Here is my inexpert experience. I've gotten back to regular picture taking over the last 10 years, and have realized that my photos are neatly divided into landscapes, posed pictures and "parental" pictures.

 

For my landscapes and posed pictures, MF film is wonderful. I shoot mostly b & w and process and print at home. I have a 16 x 20 hanging in our local fine restaurant, my first publicly exhibited photo. Love it.

 

I drag out the MF for posed pictures, of the family group at holidays, or individual kids when I can get them to pose without too much complaining. Color or b& w is great, and I love to have them blown up.

 

But for "parental" pictures of my kids, such as your anticipated adoption picture, digital rules. For years I shot 35mm with heavy 2.8 lenses and 800 speed film in dark gyms (bball teams) or dark auditoriums (band solos)resulting in photos only a father could love. I got a Nikon D70 (already had the lenses), and my kids concert or graduation pictures sprang to life. Much steadier in the dark ( adjustable film speed up to 1600), and the immediate preview is like magic.

 

If I were starting out again, I'd get a dslr and a twin lens reflex, and call it a day.

 

Good luck.

The new Tri-x shows a standard development time of around 3.75

minutes for H-110 b), down from 7.5 minutes for the previous version

(according to the massive devel chart). This is awfully short. Can

I further dilute and develop longer, and what change would this

make? For my home developed B&W I stick with 1 camera (Rolliflex),

1 film and 1 developer. What happened?

My Hassleblad 500 Classic (1991), very light use, is testing me.

I've learned how to avoid (or fix) the lens/uncocked shutter jam,

but camera is now jamming during winding. The crank will jam,

usually towards the end of the cycle (the mirror has returned). By

wiggling or forcing it will pop into place (or pop off the crank

handle). This started during a roll, and that roll came out with

much overlap. On further testing, the jamming happens without film

in the camera, and with both of my backs. It does not happen if I

cycle through with no back on. Could both of my backs have the same

problem? Just take the whole kit to the shop? Anyone else have this

bug? Thanks in advance.

Everyone has their favorite travel combinations; I just got back from northern Italy, and here is mine. MF: Rolleiflex 2.8f (I have a Rollicord V which is just as good from f8 up and 1/60 up, and is in your price range). Light, no batteries, awesome images. Even landscapes look good in squares, and you have lots of room to crop. With no mirror, you can take sharp shots at 1/30 handheld. Even a light tripod gives razor sharpness. 35mm: AF Nikon with 24, 50, 80-200 2.8. Some shots need telephoto or width. The 80-200 is great for when you are willing to carry a heavy camera; the 24 with the body is almost pocket sized. The whole combo fits into a reasonably small bag. I think it would be difficult to find sufficient speed, low light performance, and lens range in MF to fill all of your travel wants without keeping the 35mm component.

Steve: As you follow this forum, you will see many people suggesting a TLR as a starting place. I got a Rolleicord V, old and cheap as MF goes, and was amazed at the quality. Because of the lack of mirror, hand held shots are much steadier than with an SLR. Try one out for a couple hundred dollars. If you take to the 6 x 6, you can then start playing the fool like the rest of us and work on building a stupidly expensive system (Hassy in my case). Even then, you'll still carry that TLR when you're worried about weight, breakage or theft (the places where you'll get your best pictures).

On my Rolleicord V I get that result if the multi exposure lever is set wrong - the film advance knob just keeps winding.

Thanks for the great advice. I am no closer to knowing what to do, but every post gives me important factors to consider. I think I'll try to rent some different gear this weekend, get away from the computer and shoot some pictures! Thanks again - this is a wonderful forum.

After inching into medium format for a year, I have a 500cm, 80m

lens, a couple backs, a polaroid back, a 2x teleconverter (cheap, but

not bad) and a sturdy tripod (3036). I want to add a wide angle for

landscapes. For the same price range as a 50mm distigon, I could get

a recent Pentax 67 with a 55m 4.0 lens. This would get me 6x7 format

for landscapes. I expect to only use the wide angle on the tripod,

so the hand holding and shutter shake problems in the Pentax threads

in theory should not hurt. On the other hand, the whole idea of

building a system would lean to staying with Hassy. Any advice would

be greatly appreciated.