terry_stedman

Hello,

 

I'm looking to buy FH-869G, the glass film holder for the nikon

coolscan 9000. The standard 120 film holder for the scanner just

doesn't cut it. The problem is that it seems to be out of stock

everywhere. Does anybody know if it is coming back into stock anytime

soon? Does getting put on a waiting list actually result in getting

the item?

 

I'm buying it for my college (ncf.edu), so I can't go the used route.

I probably can't buy from private owners either.

 

Thanks,

Terry Stedman

I've used a RB67 handheld without problems. If you have a strap, its really no problem, though your arms will get tired. With a waist level finder, its not hard hold and fire both the camera and flash. With a prism, the thing gets really heavy. Its a two handed job, then. So if you want to hand hold the flash, then you need to get a monopod and grip. With all that, its like moving around a cinderblock on a pole, but I've done it, and everything turned out fine.

 

As for vibration, the RB67 has awesome vibration dampening. The firing sound is really loud, but the camera doesn't shake much. I've done 1/60th handholding with a 90mm lens, and the images turned out fine.

 

Nevertheless, you ought to consider that the rb67 is designed for use on a tripod. If you want to primarily handhold, you should get a camera designed for that - like a rangefinder or TLR. All the name brand MF cameras have good optics; the only real difference is that modern rangefinders are sharper.

thanks to everyone for the suggestions.

 

I'm not too keen on auto-anything for this kind of stuff. As bad or slow as I might be in focusing, I'm sure faster and better than a computer in low-light situations with multiple figures. As for exposure, I've worked out a system: keeping the shutter open for a second or half second, and firing my flash manually at the right moment. I hate freezing dancing.

 

Anyway, I don't mind auto features if I can turn them off, its just that they don't factor into my decision-making.

 

I'm very leary of folders; it seems like their more of an investment of time than money, though maybe money too ;).

 

thanks again

terry

T is like B(ulb), except that, rather than having the shutter remain open as long as the release is pressed, it keeps the shutter open until the film is advanced. So press once, and the shutter is open until you cock the advance.

Hello,

<p>

I'm a big time medium format fan. I'm also into party/nightlife

photography. These two things are hard to reconcile. I've been

shooting nightlife for about half a year now with my Mamiya RB67.

It's pretty ridiculous - with a prism and grip, I need a monopod to be

able to move around without injuring myself. It looks like <a

href="

(you can see my flash in my pocket).

<p>

Its gotten to the point that I can't seem to make any more decent

photos - they all look the same, because they're all at waist or eye

level, basically the same distance from the subject because its hard

to change the focus at night, straight on because its hard to move

around quickly, etc. Hey, they're still good, I'm just frustrated by

the lack of dynamics in my photos for whats supposed to be a dynamic

topic. You can see what I mean <a

href="http://flickr.com/photos/stedman/sets/1065929/">here</a>

<p>

So, I think my solution, my magic bullet if you would, is a new mf

camera. Specifically, a rangefinder. As a college student, my

affordibility range is severely limited; my holy grail, the mamiya 7,

is way out of reach. I'm looking instead at fuji 6X9 rangefinders,

which KEH has in the $400 range every now and then. I'd have to save

up to get one. Are there good alternatives? The Koni-omega rapid

seems like a good camera, but I'm afraid it might be just as much a

brick as my RB. The price is about right, however; they seem to go on

ebay for under 200 dollars. Plus, the possibility of a wide angle

lens, which I dearly covet, excites me. Are there other alternatives?

I don't want to "step down" to 645. I love my 6X7, and only want to

get bigger; however, a wide-angle, low cost 645 rangefinder that fits

my demands is too much to resist.

<p>

I know the demands of my practice seem a bit peculiar; I need a light

weight, easy to focus in low light, big neg camera. Wide-angle is

possible. Oh, and good optics. At a college-student price. help?

<p>

Thanks,

Terry Stedman

Meters are or can be really cheap. Check <a href="http://www.keh.com/shop/product.cfm?bid=GM&cid=70&sid=newused&crid=13026954">KEH</a> or <a href="http://photography.listings.ebay.com/Lighting-Studio-Equipment_Light-Meters_W0QQcatrefZC4QQcoactionZcompareQQcoentrypageZsearchQQcopagenumZ1QQfromZR10QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsacatZ88668QQsocmdZListingItemList">ebay</a>. If you want a spot meter, be prepared to pay hundreds of dollars. Otherwise, you can get decent, old light meters (often, powered not by battery but by the selenium light-sensitive cell) for 40 dollars or less (down to around 5 dollars on ebay.)

Disabling the monitor calibration and using adobe gamma did the trick. thanks!

Hello,

 

For the first time in a while, I booted up photoshop to edit a black

and white image. The grayscale image showed up in photoshop as being

sort of sepia toned, though. The image in the windows picture viewer

is black and white, and through firefox, its black and white, but in

photoshop, its displayed as sepia. If I mess with the image and save

it, when I open it in a different program, its normal black and white

instead of sepia. Further experimentation has shown that the sepia

tone replaces gray throughout the color spectrum when I convert it to RGB.

 

I know the problem has to be color calibration, but I can't seem to

find any fix - going through the color settings and assigning various

profiles, to the program over all or just the image, subtly changes

tones, but it still stays distinctly sepia. Uninstalling, and

removing preferences, and reinstalling photoshop makes no difference.

 

It's occurred to me that it could also have something to do with my

monitor - which I've replaced since the last time I've used photoshop

(when gray would display correctly). I went from a CRT to a nice LCD.

I'm not sure why that would make a difference, but its the only change

that I can think of. I don't have access to a color calibrator, so

I've just calibrated the monitor by eye using the program that came

with the monitor.

 

If someone could tell me what's going on, or help me figure it out,

I'd be much appreciative.

 

Thanks you,

Terry

You can go as large as you want. After a certain size, maybe 16X20, the print won't hold up if you look at it up close - as one might for an 8X10, for instance. But if you've got a 20X30 print, you aren't going to look at it from a foot away - you look at it hanging on a wall 5 feet or more away. The bigger it is, the farther away you are as you look at it. Thats why the billboard comment is absolutely correct.

 

Anyway, I went to a gallery recently at looked at some 30X40 digitally produced c-prints from an RZ. They looked great from normal viewing distance, and up close, eyes a foot away from the print, they had noticable grain but definate sharpness.

While I haven't used a C330s, I have used a C220f, and the screen is plenty bright to me. I didn't notice a difference when going from the C220f to the RB67.

 

I've also used a C33, and must say that you're probably going to want to go with as late a model as possible. As Mag says, the best replacement/backup would be another of the same, but I find the C220f to be easy to use and enjoyable. And it should be cheaper.

Uniquephoto.com has it (135 and 120) at 2.45, but you have to buy 10 units.

First, check out this <a href="http://www.btinternet.com/~g.a.patterson/mfaq/m_faq-contents.html">web page</a>, it has all the information you could want.

<p>

point by point:

<p>

1) check out the website, you'll get all the info you'll ever want there

<p>

2) dunno. I suggest just not shooting anything that close without a paralax corrector, which attaches to a tripod.

<p>

3) You have to trick the camera into thinking there's film in it (Or actually shoot a test roll, which I encourage you to do to make sure your lenses are all right).

<p>

4) Its not obvious, but the lock/unlock DOES lock and unlock the lens into place. Try locking it and taking the lens off. You'll find that the support bar holding in the lens across the top of the camera is restricted by a little latch. That is, if its not broken. I have two TLRs, one of them has a broken latch and the other works fine. Obviously, the only problem if it's broken is that the safe guard doesn't work; it doesn't effect the camera's performance otherwise.

<p>

5) yes, its just to remind you about the ISO speed of the film. I think its there because there's no little box for you to put the tab from the film box with the ISO number on it anywhere on the back (if you have no idea what I'm talking about, then... well, don't worry, just ignore the ISO dial, you're not missing anything new)

<p>

6) Check out the website, it has all the info you could want on accessories. May I remind you that <a href="http://keh.com/hmpg/index.cfm">KEH</a> usually has the best deals on Mamiya TLR equipment aside from you-know-who.

<p>

7) Check the website.

<p>

8) Anything that's not cheap. The TLR is heavier than many modern 35mm SLRs, you're not going to be able to get away with plastic tripods. But, anything decent and rated at, say, 5 pounds, is probably fine. I've used a C220f on a Bogen/Manfrotto 3265 quick action ballhead and it worked fine (its rated at 5.6 pounds). Spend real money on a tripod if you're planning on using one, it's well worth it and you get what you pay for.

<p>

9) You need a PC sync cord, and either a flash that has a PC sync input or a PC sync to hotshoe adapter. Make sure the little switch on all your lenses is at X instead of M - M is for bulb flashes, X is for those new fangled electronic ones.

<p>

As for straps, some models of the TLRs had little knobs on the sides of the camera instead of the more standard strap hook things. Those knobs require lugs. You can get them at KEH or other places; I started a thread on that subject maybe a year ago if you find yourself with the problem of not knowing what to do with the knobs, you can find it in the archives.

<p>

Enjoy your camera, it's a great machine.

I say it depends on what kind of shooting you're going to do. The RZ67 is a big camera, and even though you can handhold it, the going is slow. Manual focusing isn't a big deal to me (I use a RB67), and in fact I prefer it. I spend enough time setting up a shot that focusing gives me a little more time to evaluate what I'm going to get out of the exposure, rather than slowing me down and causing me to miss something or get bogged down in manual tasks. The bellows focusing on the Mamiya 67 and TLRs is amazing, and I would never consider giving it up.

 

On the other hand, if you're going to be shooting 35mm style - focusing on whats going on through the viewfinder rather than carefully positioning the camera and its settings - I think a AF 645 is a good fit: in addition to the AF you're used to, you get more exposures, a lighter camera, more handholdibility, and a different set of lenses.

 

My opinion is don't base your decision on your penchant for AF, base it on how the whole package fits your style.

No idea how it works, and certainly don't think its worth it, but <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=204219&is=REG">this</a> is a digital back that works with a Mamiya RB67 (as non-electric a camera has you can get), and apparently also works with "Hasselblad 500 Series (200 Series custom fit); Mamiya 645, RB and RZ; Bronica ETR-Si and SQB; Fuji GX680, Contax 645, DigiWide."

While your camera will probably be just fine, if you're thinking that it may not be enough or be too expensive to repair/replace, consider that Mamiya's 67 series (RB67, all mechanical, and RZ67, electronic with capabilities for a digital back that will come out soon direct from Mamiya) is basically designed for studio work. They're beasts; while a Hasselblad could be described as elegant and dependable, the Mamiya's are better described as capable and rugged. You will probably find the Mamiyas to be less expensive than the Hasselblads, while delivering the same quality.

 

If you do more than portrait, the Mamiya cameras have built in bellows which will be very useful for macro or close up work.

Question: Why are hoods round and not rectangular?

Don -

 

This is what you said in your other post: "I have been shooting mainly 4x5 and larger for 5 or 6 years. I don't use this format for more casual pr candid photography, or when on vacation with my wife. She doesn't like standing around for hours while I shoot. I understand. I used to use a 35mm Canon Ftb for such photography but I have been spoiled by the larger negatives... I might also use a medium format camera for some portrait work."

 

Sounds to me like you want an inobtrusive MF camera that's quick and simple. You've ruled out rangefinders, because you can't afford one (really, the Mamiya 6 or 7, or Fuji rangefinder is what you want). The thing about the Mamiya RB67 is that it's huge... especially with the bellows out. With the bellows in, it's 10 inches with a 90mm lens, bellows out its a foot. Thats what's pointing AT the person. You can't conceal an RB67, and you can't quickly snap off shots. The RB is designed for a more contemplative approach - something you have more than covered with a 4X5 camera. Further, while I defend the RB's handholdiblity, it's not a lie to say the camera was built with an inclination towards tripod work.

 

I've never used the Pentax 67 - or even held one - so I don't know if it's what you want, it may also be too large and clunky. I'm really thinking a rangefinder is your answer. That, or a (steady yourself) TLR. TLRs are in a class of their own when it comes to candid photography, and are so unthreatening and unusual that it helps in portraiture. Of course, they're 6x6. But, you can get a Mamiya TLR for less than 200 bucks off ebay, or 300 bucks off KEH.

 

All I'm saying is that I picked up a vibe for what you want, and, while I love them, I don't think the RB67 is gunna satisfy you.

Don't believe the people who say you can't hand hold the RB67. I do it a lot. It's obviously made to be used on a tripod, but it's definately handholdable. In fact, I find it much easier to hold without the left hand grip - I find the camera too heavy to hold from the side with my left hand. I grip the bottom of the camera with my right hand, and focus and operate the lens controls and focusing with my left, and fire the shutter with my right index finger, which goes right over the release. Its then easy to cock the shutter again with my right thumb, and advance the film with the same (shifting the weight in my hand to stretch out for it). With a strap to help with the weight and to help lug it around, it's really quite easy, though heavy. However, I've gone shooting for hours in the Florida heat, and its no more irritating than a heavy 35mm system.

<p>

I don't think the RB67 is a good camera for what you want to use it for, but don't believe people when they say you can't hold it. I did <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/3268219">this image</a> hand held, and thats with the camera pointed straight down. It might have been easier to do with a tripod, but as you can see, it worked quite well handheld. (if you think the image is a little fuzzy, it's because I forgot to sharpen it after shrinking the image size. At full size the catfish is tack sharp)

I have, use, and love my RB67 pro-s. However, if you want a MF solution for vacation/candid shooting, and no tripod, I cannot suggest the RB67. While I shoot handheld with it all the time, it is nowhere near comparable to 35mm cameras in terms of ease of use or shooting style. If you want something that is a compromise between LF quality and 35mm ease of use, definately go for:

 

A rangefinder - the Mamiya 7 (ourfit from KEH in excellent condition - $1,340), or maybe a Fuji option (GW670III with attached 90mm lens, in excellent plus condition - $889)

 

The Pentax 67 - I don't believe that stuff about mirror slap on slower shutter speeds - the Mamiya RB should have a heavier slap and I don't have a problem with it. A bargain condtion 67 with ttl and 105 lens is $516.

 

645 camera - Hey, I know its smaller than 6X7, but its definately better than 35mm, and have all the things you want in a body thats as easy and quick as a 35mm camera. If you find that what you want out of a 67 camera is too expensive, then this is better than sticking with 35mm.

I can't give you all the technical info you want, but I do have experience with Acros in night photography. I developed several rolls of Acros 120 using stand development, and using a non-standard dilution of HC-110, and the negs turned out very printable (with great distinction between super-deep, completely detail-less shadows, and very-deep, just a shade lighter shadows, and every tone all the way up to burnt-out street lamps). The dilution I used ended up being somewhere around 1:150 from concentrate. I measured out 12 mL of stock solution, which is equivilent to the 3mL of concentrate required for adequate development, and therefore the very minimum possible for 120 film, and diluted it until I had enough "working strength" developer to fill my tank. Pour it all in there, agitate for about a minute and a half, and let sit for two solid hours.

 

I have some examples, but they aren't immediately availible. Anyway, I was very satisfied with this stand development practice.

The T is for time, as opposed to B for bulb. Firing while in T should make all the noise and thunder as a normal exposure, but when you push down the lever on the side, you'll hear the lens click as the shutter closes. If you hear the noise the lens makes as it does a one second exposure (you know the sort of rapid ticking noise) while on T, something's wrong with your lens. If you're doing T - or anything longer than maybe 1/8th of a second, you oughta do a mirror lock up, which is done by pulling out the N/M knob on the lens, and rotating it towards M. If you have a cable release, stick it in there. Set the lens on any shutter speed, and fire the camera normally (the silver button). You'll hear that incredibly loud mirror slap. Then, press in the cable release, or if you don't have one, rotate the knob back to N with your fingers. The shutter will fire independantly of the camera body. If the shutter is on T, pushing down the lever will close the shutter.

 

Note that you can get a double cable relase, with threads that fit both into the silver button, and another that goes into the knob, but there's really no point to that; just get a normal cable release and fit it in into the knob, and fire the silver button manually, then fire the shutter with the cable release.

How much can he afford? If he really wants new, he could wait for the Mamiya ZD to come out - 22 megapixels in a somewhat-bulky-but-definately-less-so-than-a-hasselblad 35mm-esque body, for an estimated 10,000 euros. I imagine the body style is more comfortable than a hasselblad with prism-finder. Supposed to be out later this year, if I remember correctly. Link <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05022403mamiya_zdpriceavail.asp">here</a>

Here's something else. The instructions I found mentioned NOT agitating the film and photo-flo. After washing, with the film still on the reel, I drop the (stainless steel) reel into a bucket of diluted photoflo. The reel is fully covered of course. After a minute, pull out the reel and let it drain a little, and then remove the film, and squeegee with my fingers, making sure to be gentle. The film dries in an film dryer within 10 minutes and I'm off to make a contact sheet.

KL lenses are a huge improvement over the C or non-C lenses. My understanding is that they have better coatings, much better quality control, and just an overall improvement. Supposedly, they're brought up to the standards of RZ lenses, though I've heard they're even better. There was a thread not to long ago rumor-mongering that the KL lenses are actually made by/with Zeiss or Zeiss glass. If you can afford a KL lens over the C lens, go for it.

Thanks for all the advice! A crown graphic looks like the answer for me, then. I'm going to start hunting on ebay for some good deals.

 

Thanks!