yoni_weismuller

Hi

After searching for my first dslr, I've decided to go for a pentax k10d.

However, I'm not very convinced about the 18-55, specially because of corners

sharpness.

I've read that the new 18-55 mm f3.5-5.6 DA II is better than the previous

version. But how much better? I now it's still a kit lens but, does it make a

real difference?

thanks

Hi,

I've had some 35mm negatives scanned, allegedly with a ls5000. The exif data of

the files seems legit (Nikon SUPER COOLSCAN 5000 ED, nikonscan 4.0.0 W, dpi,

4000, etc) and the files are huge indeed. Also, it is clear that ICE has been

applied.

The issue comes when I compare the scans of the ls5000 with the ones obtained

with a ls1000 and vuescan from the same negative. The picture is bigger, but i

see no extra detail. Moreover, I've upscaled the ls1000 scans from its 2400 to

4000 with photoshop cs3 and the results are about the same.

Now, some *unedited* images:

full frame:

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/4122/fullframedp2.jpg

ls5000 crop:

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/6777/cropls5000kk1.jpg

ls1000 crop:

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/9537/cropls1000ut6.jpg

ls1000 crop upscaled to 4000dpi:

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/4779/cropls1000upscaledco8.jpg

My questions are:

Is this because, generally speaking, there's no information worth 4000 dpi in a

35mm negative (shot with reflex camera, 55m fixed focus lens, hand held, asa100)?

Where my expectations regarding the ls5000 too high or am i comparing the scans

incorrectly?

Am i just a pixel-perfect paranoid or there's something wrong here?

thanks

Hi

You may already know, there's a review at photo-i of the new epson

v700. As usual, the initial film scans were clearly not as good as

those from dedicated film scanners.

However, this model allows the height of the film holder above the

scanner bed to be adjusted. The reviewer says setting the height to

3.5mm seems to deliver a noticeable increase in scan sharpness.

Check page 13 of the review:

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20V700/page_13.htm

"I also repeated the Nikon 4000 test scan with the height adjusters

set to 3.5mm and can now say that the Epson V700 has turned in a

better sacn than the dedicated film scanner.."

This could be what many hobbyists were expecting. What do you think?

regards

Hi

i've ebay-ed a nikon ls-1000 a couple of months ago. Film scans (with

vuescan) aren't very satisfactory (reala so far) in terms of color

accuracy (i get a green cast quite difficult to correct).

However, slide scans (fuji sensia) render nice colors that get even

better with curves tweaking.

I'm not using a calibration target for sensia and i've tried different

color output /film type in vuescan.

I would have expected still a bit of color cast with slides...but i

dare say there's no trace of it. So...i ask you:

Is it that the scanner doesn't like reala?

Is it simply that slides are 'easier' color wise?

Is it that i wasted my money with the ls-1000? (I'm starting to

suspect so...:-).

regards

Hi

There's a full review at www.photo-i.co.uk.

According to this review it's much better to get a 4870/4990/9950f. It has no ice and i think i recall it has certain unnecessary/weird features...and it's not a dedicated film scanner in terms of performance.

regards

Hi

There's a product called pec-12. Never used it, but i've heard it works fine cleaning negatives. By the way, does your scanner have ICE?

regards

The thing is that i already have (well, my father has :-)) a 28mm and a 70-200 telephoto. But to be sincere, carrying the whole gear is a real pain for me...so i though i could find a decent multi porpose lens.

regards

Hi

I usually shot with a pentax k1000 mounting a 50mm (or was it 55?:-P)

pentax lens.

Sometimes i've felt the need of a bit of zoom, and i'm searching the

second hand market for such lens.

I've came across the following:

Pentax-A 28-80mm zoom 1:3.5-4.5.

I'm just an amateur photographer, however, used to the sharpness and

lack of distortions of the 50mm, i fear that this zoom may not

satisfy me....but then again i'm fed up of going back and foward

with the 50mm to get the pictures i want :-), so i'm tempted to get

the zoom.

Any ideas? I'm aware it's maybe a kit lens, but i'd like to know if

it's enough for simple hobbytists.

thanks

I'm not an expert, just an hobbytist, but it looks like a hardware fault to me.

Don't know if it would be worth repairing it. however, take into consideration that high end flatbeds probably produce better scans that our old ls-1000s. (take a look at www.photo-i.co.uk.)

So, i hope you can finally get the ls-1000 to work. But if not, maybe an epson 4180 or even 3170 would be an option to consider.

regards.

Hi Simone,

This is the link:

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.periphs.scanners/browse_frm/thread/c2421e86c5ed0019/59b6a0de72372a81?q=ls-1000+win+xp&rnum=1#59b6a0de72372a81

It's a step by step guide to install the ls-1000 under winxp from scratch, i followed it with no problems.

regards

Hi

I'm using a ls-1000 under win xp pro. I would advise you to do the following:

- uninstall everything, including your scsi card, drivers, etc

- install again from scratch. Search at comp.periphs.scanners something like "ls-1000 win xp" - there's a recent post that might help you.

If problems arise again, it might be the scanner, not your system nor the software. My ls takes around 40secs to scan a frame, i have no problems using nikonscan (apart from its poor quality) and vuescan just produces nice scans.

regards

My ls-1000 has a green cast instead...when using nikonscan under winxp. I solved the problem using vuescan. Among several color balance options there's a "white balance" one that works fine for me.

I think there's a linux version.

regards.

Maybe the flatbed canon 9950f + silverfast 6 suits your needs. It's not a film scanner but still a capable scanner. I think i recall it can scan a whole roll in one go, plus silverfast allows you to use different settings for each frame and also to make multipass scans.

Take a look at:

www.photo-i.co.uk, both at the 9950f review as well as the silverfast 6 review.

regards

Hi

I'm scanning ilford fp4 (iso 125) film and fuji reala with a nikon

ls1000 and ilford scans seem quite more sharper than those made from

reala film (before and after sharpening)

Is the ilford B/W contrast fooling my eyes? Is it due to the grain

(maybe more grain on ilford scans leads to think i'm getting more

detail out of the ilford??).

regards

Hi

Maybe you could measure your expectations in terms of the maximum print size you can produce from the scans. I guess you could get sharp A4 size prints.

Talking about photoshop processing, you could to tweak levels/curves, remove spots, apply unsharp Mask and then maybe smooth the image using neatimage or noise ninja. Take a look at scantips.com.

However, the most important thing to be happy with a flatbed is not to have the same negative/slide scanned by the flatbed and by a film scanner. Ignorance is bless! ;-)

Hi

Hope i'm posting this in the right forum, i'm sorry if it's not the case.

After taking a look at the guide to wacom tablets, i'm still confused.

These are my needs:

- Retouching and removing scratchs, creating masks on a single

monitor, winXP system, with a fixed resolution of 1024x768, using

Photoshop.

- i'm not planning to do any drawings or otherwise artistic work.

would you say the wacom volito III is enough for me? Is it really

necessary to go for a Graphire or simply 'adviced'?

thanks.