edward_karaa1

<p>For those who are still scanning film, especially color reversal, I would like to know your opinion on this. I have always found digital color not as attractive as that from scanned Provia or Velvia while digital seems to be better in sharpness and grain/noise (well there is also the DR which is still a controversial subject).<br /><br />I have noticed that in digital, reds, blues, and greens contain higher levels of the other 2 complementary colors, which produces a somehow washed out rendition. Scanned film tends to produce purer, reds, blues and greens with much less of the other colors. RGB channels in digital are somewhat overlapping, while scanned film tends to show more separate, or not as homogenous RGB channels. Scanned film gives deeper reds, blues and greens.<br /><br />The reason I believe is that digital tries to keep all RGB channels within the limit of the color space, similar to a relative colorimetric rendition. This reduces noise and creates "dull" colors. As soon as you try to make digital look like Velvia for instance, the noise quickly gets incontrollable. <br /><br />Am I right in this? And if yes, there must be a way to get film colors from digital, by somehow achieving an absolute colorimetric rendition. How to achieve that? (Though I expect it will be very noisy) (I also suspect that the extra noise of the Sony A900 is caused by this as well, as I and many others here have raved about it's film-like color rendition).<br /><br />Your comments would be greatly appreciated, as I have probably gotten it all wrong.</p>

Thanks a lot for the interesting link and info. I'm already aware that the 18mm may not work with the 5D, but it seems there are some exceptions. I wouldn't mind buying an adapter and trying it, but I'm worried the mirror might hit the rear element and ruin the lens for me. I would be interested in hearing from anyone who is able to make it work and see how he does it. Cheers, Edward

Is anyone here able to use this combination? Just curious to know since I have

both and would like to gather some info before I get an adapter.

In my opinion, there is no secret, you just have to keep on cleaning the head until it prints correctly. In my experience with Epson printers, you have to print every few days if you don't want this clogging to happen.

Labs usually scan at 1200X1800 pixels, hardly enough for an 8X10. Best option is to scan yourself with a dedicated film scanner which usually can give you plenty of resolution. My Nikon 5000 gives me 22MP files. Optical prints in my opinion are fine up to 8X10 or 10X12, after that you loose contrast and saturation as well as corner sharpness.

I get best results from Zeiss Lens Cleaner combined with the special lens cleaning cloth from the same company. I never wash the cloth, just throw it away when it's dirty, and get a new one.

An Olympus Stylus Epic would also be an excellent alternative.

Has anyone used this software? Does it work with Nikon Coolscan 5000? Any

comments?

 

Thanks,

Edward

In addition to all the good points mentioned above, there is also the resolution factor. Slide film has usually higher resolution than an equivalent negative film.

In my experience most cameras' average TTL metering copes well with night scenes. You only have to experiment a little to see how your camera meter behaves. Most of my EOS cameras needed about -1 stop correction while my Contax are usually spot on without needing any correction. Bracketing is of course indispensable no matter how accurately you spot meter the scene.

For shooting through the windshield, longer lenses at infinity and at larger apertures are bette. It also helps if your surroundings are dark.

 

As for shots like your example including the interior, I have no idea :)

Forget about Bangkok. Nikon prices are crazy over here.

I do use an air blower before scanning, but it is by far not as efficient as the battery powered anti-static brush I used in my darkroom days. In fact, I suspect the air blower to just have the opposite effect.

Hello.

 

Which setting works better for you? I use a Nikon 5000 scanner, and I found

that Normal does not remove all the blemishes, while Fine kills a lot of

detail. So I'm kind of lost here. Does sharpening bring back any of the lost

detail in Fine mode?

Thanks,

Thanks Kai for your reply. I have found the problem and it is actually the S2 mirror. It protrudes by 2-3 mm beyound the lower support, which is quite strange. It's like the mirror has slipped while being glued, never seen this in my life. I took the S2 to a camera repair shop and they'll try to fix it, even though they were quite skeptical as the glue is very hard and it would be difficult to remove the mirror without breaking it.

Hello!

 

I have purchased this lens recently and it works fine on the Contax Aria.

However, when mounted on the S2 body, the mirror flips up but hits the metal

around the rear element on the way down. The viewfinder blacksout and I have

to remove the lens in order to allow for the mirror to return to place. While

removing the lens the mirror is touching the rear glass and has caused already

an obvious scratch.

 

 

I understand this lens is incompatible with the 5D for the same reason, but

with a Contax body, this seems absurd. Is this a known issue with this

body/lens combination? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks,

Edward

Anyone knows a good repair technician in Bangkok, preferably knowledgeable in

Contax? The dealer closed down over here, but there must be some previous

technicians around who have worked with Contax. Any info would be greatly

appreciated.

While there is no doubt that digital will eventually surpass film, there has been some trend recently of the digital generation (people who started photography with digital) to start being interested in film. Many people who discarded their SLRs and bought into digital are returning partially or completely to film. Many professionals use both as per the requirements of the clients or the particular subject. My local used camera equipment shop used to be full of older SLRs, now you can hardly find any and the prices soared up. I bought recently 2 Contax bodies and 10 lenses, in fact emulating my old Contax equipment I have sold very cheaply 5 years ago when I switched to digital. I paid now for the almost same used equipment almost double the sum I paid when I first purchased my new Contax gear. My local pro-lab told me they having getting an increasing number of film customers after an initial drop, most new clients are hobbyists but the trend is there.

There was a shop in Siam Square that did just that. There are many shops in MBK (maboonkrong) as well.

I had to go through 4 digital bodies in 4 years before I decided to switch back to film. But be careful, the backward path is also addictive. After only a few months of shooting film, I decided that AF is not fun, so I tried to MF my Eos lenses, not an easy task. Now I paid a substantial sum for 2 Contax bodies and 8 tack sharp Carl Zeiss lenses. My Eos bodies and lenses are now for sale, luckily not too difficult to get rid of since there are so many buyers out there. Unfortunately, I found out that CZ lenses have doubled in value since I sold my Contax equipment 4 years ago, especially with all those Canon DSLR shooters buying CZ glass, and no current production to refill the gaps. Decidedly, dropping the Contax brand, especially the Manual Focus lenses was a very foolish decision by Kyocera.

Wow! Thank you so much Steve for the expert's insight. Greatly appreciated.

Thank you all for your replies. Any idea about the current value on the second hand market?

Hello,

 

I am considering buying this lens, but the MTF chart on their website doesn't

seem impressive. Anyone has used this lens? Opinions? Any ideas about its

current value on the used market?

 

My other option is the 25mm f/2.8 but it only received an 3.4 on photodo.com.

Any thoughts?

 

Thanks.

I use UV filters on all my lenses, and I did notice as Allan did that the filters can accumulate with time a layer of oily substances probably due to air pollution (I live in Bangkok one of the most polluted cities in the world). This is much more difficult to clean than dust and dirt, and is one of the reasons why I always keep the filters on. I wouldn't want this stuff to stick to the front elements of the lenses. However, the filter is not supposed to cause blurry pictures. The difference with and without should not be visible at normal magnifications unless it involves flare caused by bad filter coating. I advise to look for the problem elsewhere, probably it's a focusing problem.

Jeff, Thanks. Very interesting link.