vuthy_chrun

I own 20 view cameras (as an avid collector more than an passionate photographer) mainly Linhof, Plaubel, Sinar and Cambo, as well hundreds of accessories from the best German, Dutch, Swiss and Japanese brands. I am now aiming my crave towards Japanese viwcamera gear by recently buying a Tachihara Hope 5x7 field viewcamara and now just ordered a Toyo 45 GII complete kit with the aluminum case. As, according to the pictures I saw of this camera I just bought but not yet received, and of those found on the Internet, and the quality of Toyo various quick roll sliders And rollfilm holders I own, I am sure that the 45 GII and variants are superbly built, even better than some Linhof I have played with. only Sinar can top Toyo in build quality, especially the Norma (I don’t own a P or P2).

I bought two Model II 12 years ago, and ran a couple of rolls through the one equipped with a Tessar lens 8 years ago. I can tell you that

the pictures were very sharp and it was a lot of fun to use, albeit very cumbersome. The second, one with a Steinheil Cassar has a

defective curtain. I just bought a third copy (Model I) this morning with a Tessar lens, and just hope that it is in working condition.

I took a few rolls of Velvia 100 with my Super Ikonta last January

while vacationing in South of Spain. I was very pleased with the

resolution of the Zeiss-Opton Tessar 105mm/3,5 and the vivid color

of the Velvia 100 positive film. Now that the price of film cameras

is dropping on a weekly basis, I am wondering whether I should get a

Mamiya 7 or 7II, and want to know if I would find noticeable

difference?

 

Has someone tested these cameras? I need a medium format camera that

I can carry with me all day, visiting places.

<p>Because a few people had said that my tests could be flawed by the use of a

low quality lens (Nikkor 200/4 circa. 1972), I did another series of tests

using a Micro-Nikkor 55mm/3.5 on Velvia 50 film.</p>

<p>Please click

<a target="_blank" href="http://www.photo-direct.net/cameras/Scan_Elite_5400-new_tests.htm">

HERE</a> to see the new set of tests.<br>

 </p>

<p class="MsoNormal">Andrew,</p>

<p class="MsoNormal">I don�t understand your comment.</p>

<p class="MsoNormal">Can you not see the hyperlinks to the Canon G5-generated

TIFF and JPEG files on my page? The goal was to allow readers to assess

themselves the differences between these formats and THEN decide to agree or

disagree with my findings.</p>

<p class="MsoNormal">Who talks about scanning negatives for the web here?</p>

<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>

<p class="MsoNormal">I also realized that I made a mistake, an extra blank space

in the path to my page, that makes the link unusable.</p>

<p class="MsoNormal">Please click

<a target="_blank" href="http://www.photo-direct.net/cameras/Canon_G5.htm">HERE</a>

to go to my page.</p>

I just finished the tests I did with the Canon G5, and also compared

its sharpness quality against a slide taken with a Nikon

FTn/24mm/2.8 on a Velvia 50 film.

 

You can read the full tests and review here: http://www.photo-

direct.net/cameras/Canon_G5.htm

Leif,

 

You are absolutely right. I do use USM in Photoshop, not with the Minolta-supplied software. I will update my text to reflect this.

 

In fact, I now do the following routine religiously when I scan a negative or a slide:

 

1) Minolta: manual focus adjustment.

 

2) Photoshop: rotate and/or crop whenever necessary.

 

3) Photoshop: Usharp Mask.

 

4) Photoshop: Auto Levels.

 

5) Photoshop: Auto Constrast.

 

6) Photoshop: Auto Color.

 

7) Photoshop: Manually color balance (if auto color is not satisfactory).

 

8) Photoshop: tweak with the 'curves' if still not statisfied with the visual result.

If your negative or slide has dust that you cannot take off, you need a software like ICE, it is not whether your film is new or old.

 

To see how effective ICE is and what time penalty you have to accept to use it, you can read my review of the new Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 at:

http://www.photo-direct.net/cameras/Scan_Elite_5400-text.htm

I recently acquired a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400. I did some

tests (you can read my detailed review and see some samples at

http://www.photo-direct.net/cameras/Scan_Elite_5400-text.htm) and

found that 2700 dpi is good enough for a 35mm negative or

transparency, and that there is not enough difference (image

sharpness) to justify the storage of your scan images in 5400 dpi

resolution (at least 100 MB per image at 5400 dpi).

 

I am interested in learning other people's opinion about the merit

of scanning a 35mm slide or negative at a higher resolution than

2700 dpi. If you think that it is worthwhile to scan at higher

resolution than 3700 dpi, then please substantiate your opinion by

showing us some scanned images.

I have taken some very sharp pictures (6x6 Velvia slides) with my Nettar 517/16 equipped with a Novar 75mm/6.3 lens. But I agree that Tessar lens is sharper than a Novar, especially if enlarge your prints to 8x10 or above.

I just learned from speaking with a Fuji USA service rep that the

GSW680III is DISCONTINUED. Would somebody know whether Fuji is

preparing a new replacement model or this camera is simply extinct

from Fuji's ccatalog? The Fuji rep would not tell me anything.

Hi,

 

I would like to have your recommendation for a good scanner for 6x9

slides. I am looking for a multi-purpose scanner that is good enough

for scanning medium format slides for less than $300 US.

I bought a Braun Norca folder with a Steinheil Cassar 105mm/6.3 lens a few months ago on eBay. It takes 120 films and has 2 flaps inside to support 2 1/3" X 3 1/4" and 2 1/4" X 2 1/2". I used it for the first time 2 weeks ago and am amazed by how sharp this lens is and also by the excellent tonal rendition with Fuji Velvia film.

 

I also bought a Bower-X folder a few months ago, again on eBay, it is made in Germany with SCHNEIDER RADIONAR 4,5/105 lens. It uses 620 film and supports 1 5/8" X 2 1/4" and 2 1/4" X 3 1/4" formats, but I have never used it.