stwrtertbsratbs5

<p>You should price out something similar from keh.com. And consider getting gear rated Ex or Ex+. It should work fine, and you'll save quite a bit over Mint.</p>

<p>I'd skip the 220 back because there's a wider range of films available in 120. And I wouldn't spring for a motor drive because I don't shoot sports or fast-moving objects with MF.</p>

<p>Here are keh prices for a nice starting kit:</p>

<p>SQ-Ai body, EX+ $235<br>

Unmetered finder, BGN, $31<br>

80mm PS lens, Ex+, $159<br>

120 back, BGN, $94</p>

<p>That gets you started for a bit over $500. I'd recommend a back in Ex or better condition, but there are none in stock. </p>

<p>Alternatively the ETRSi is a screaming bargain if you decide to try 645.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>"I believe Nikon Coolscans are not available new anymore and arguably the 9000 might not be manufactured anymore."</p>

<p>Not true. They are available new, but Nikon makes them in batches so availability is spotty. I just saw several flickr posts last week by people who just acquired Nikon scanners recently.</p>

<p>You may want to look at the CF Systems ColorPerfect Photoshop plug-in for scanning and color correcting negatives. I use it for all inverts and color corrections of negative materials. Info is here:</p>

<p>http://www.colorneg.com/warumcolorneg_sw.html?lang=en<br>

http://www.colorneg.com/oldneg.html?lang=en</p>

<p>As for scanners - consumer flatbeds will struggle with dense slides, so it's nice that you may have access to a Nikon scanner.</p>

<p>Here's a good site for camcorder reviews:</p>

<p>http://www.camcorderinfo.com/ratings.php</p>

<p>I recently bought a Panasonic HDC-TM700K. It's not the cheapest choice, but the image quality is absolutely stunning.</p>

<p>"Your pump release should be fine and, please ignore my ignorance, if your camera has an MLU mirror lock up option that would help as well."</p>

<p>The vast majority of large format cameras do not have mirrors.</p>

<p>"I'd choose Hasselblad over Bronica. Better selection of used gear, and a higher chance of finding a tech to work on it if it breaks. Bronica is superb, but it was never as popular as Hasselblad and finding parts and service in the future might be an issue."</p>

<p>Hasselblads are excellent, but they are more expensive than Bronicas. As for finding a tech to work on a Bronica - I've never had an issue. They really aren't that complicated, particularly when compared to a modern DSLR. So, yes, get the Blad if it fits your budget. Might be tough to stay below $1,000 once you add in a few lenses.</p>

<p>Sorry, Garrison, but Andrew's advice is solid. It's idiotic for most uses to buy a motherboard to support future processors. Most of us use our systems for several years and then upgrade everything at once. So you're planning to put a new processor into an old box at some point? Hard drives don't last forever, and who knows what will happen in two years. But, hey, it's your money to waste.</p>

<p>I was very happy with 11x14 inch B&W prints from 645. My prints that size from 4x5 are better, though. So it's subjective. Color is easier to print a bit larger because grain is softer. But I'm talking about darkroom prints. Digital prints will depend upon the quality of the scans.</p>

<p>It's always nice to have a larger negative, but compromises are often required. My main MF camera is now a Mamiya 7 II, but I wouldn't recommend it as a first MF camera because of the price and because rangefinders have their own set of compromises.</p>

<p>I'd suggest a Bronica ETRSi (645) or the Bronica SQ series (6x6) as possibilities. They portable enough to carry about, the lenses are excellent and have leaf shutters, and the system is inexpensive. You won't have a lot invested, and you can always sell and try something different after you gain experience. </p>

<p>You can get started with an ETRSi in excellent condition with a body, back, normal lens, and non-metered finder for under $300 (keh.com).</p>

<p>You may want to consider renting a longer lens. The rental prices generally aren't bad, and you won't have to crop as much.</p>

<p>Go handle some cameras and buy the one that brings a smile to your face. You'll know. It will be the one that feels right in your hand - the texture of the surface, the layout of buttons will all feel right. Then go out and enjoy your new Nikon!</p>

<p>The Slik 700DX is pretty decent for $100, but it's heavy. But that only leaves you $100 for a ball head. Keep saving!</p>

<p>Mike - What scanner did you use?</p>

<p>Why have you settled on 67 or 6x6? How large do you intend to print? Will you mostly shoot color or B&W?</p>

<p>I'd suggest that you look at leaf shutter systems so you get flash sync at all speeds. Hasselblad is nice if you have the budget. Look at Bronica if you want real value. The GS-1 is 67 and is more portable than the Mamiya RZ or RB. The Bronica ETRSi is excellent if you decide the 645 fits the bill.</p>

<p>"Yet again, without knowing your maximum print size, all the Nikon 9000 advices are made on the asumption that you'll spend about $2000 on a scanner. If you only print up to 12x12 and don't want to look at the print with a loupe, it is basically a waste of money."</p>

<p>I wouldn't bother shooting MF if I only wanted to make small prints.</p>

<p>I had pcsforeveryone.com build my last pc because they'll customize, including the choice of a case. Their web site makes it easy to build your own configuration.</p>

<p>http://www.pcsforeveryone.com/</p>

<p>As for actual components, look at some of the review sites - many of them run performance tests with Photoshop. I'd probably opt for an Intel i7-860 processor with 8 GB RAM if I were buying today. Or you could wait 6 months and hope that Intel launches 32 nm quad desktop processors. Here's a link to Photoshop performance tests:</p>

<p>http://www.anandtech.com/show/2839/3</p>

<p>I ponied up the money for a Nikon CS9000 a few years ago; it's now worth more than what I paid for it. I wish I could say the same think about my stock market investments.</p>

<p>"If you're using a fine grain grain film in a high accutance developer, like Acros in Rodinal, you don't need large format. While I've not enlarged to 36", I have done 16x20 with 120 Acros (6x7 format) in D-76 with great results. Grain is hardly noticeable, and they are very sharp. So, shouldn't be any issues to 36"</p>

<p>Russ - your extrapolation is unreasonable. There's a huge difference going for 16x20 to 36x36. The 36x36 is 4x the area of the 16x20. You're advocating going from a 9x enlargement factor to a 16x enlargement. You will see grain, and tonality will suffer.</p>

<p>"But, the 9000 is no longer manufactured and is heading in to the twilight-zone sooner or later."</p>

<p>The end of the Nikon 9000 has been predicted for years, but batches show up periodically. I haven't seen any official Nikon announcements that it's been discontinued.</p>

<p>I agree with Bruce - large format is a better choice for large prints. As for film/developer, you're already using one of my favorites: Acros and XTOL. The only difference is that I dilute 1:2.</p>

<p>I lived in Hartford for 1 year, 9 months, 18 days, and 13 hours. My conclusion was that it was two hours away from anyplace that I'd rather be. Take a road trip to Boston, Vermont, or New York. The Connecticut shore is nice - if you can get access, and it's less than 2 hours away.</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

<p>You would have discovered that your 'genius idea' has already been invented if you'd used the search function. You can order a piece of ANR glass cut to fit the Nikon holders from Focal Point:</p>

<p>http://www.fpointinc.com/glass.htm</p>

<p>A day trip to Monterey is to sea kayak fun. You can see sea otters and sea lions in a stunning setting.</p>

<p>http://www.montereybaykayaks.com/go_kayaking/monterey_bay.lasso</p>

<p>The fly in the ointment is that some light sources do not behave as black body radiators. Sodium lights, for example, have a 'spiky' spectrum. But that's a quantum mechanics problem . . .</p>

<p>I try to avoid proprietary flash technology because I use flash with medium and large format, too. It' easier to work using similar methods for all situations. And preflash is really annoying. YMMV.</p>

<p>It's my favorite 'high speed' film. I usually rate it at 640 when I want to retain good shadow detail.</p>