kryn_sporry1

Hi guys,

 

I am trying to get an affordable second back for my Hasselblad

2000FC.

I was thinking about using an A24 as they seem to be cheaper, but

some people seem to be against it.

Now I can get my hands on cheap "hasselblad 12on" backs, but what

does "12on" actually mean? Is it just an old version of the back

(with the covered hole in the rear), or is this yet another type of

back? I almost bought an affordable A12 back but I found out in time

that it was a "superslide", which masks an area of 4x4 cm. (Why

anyone would want to do that with a 6x6 I don't understand...). I

don't want to make that mistake with a "12on" back. Is it the same

as a standard A12 back?

Thanks!

I found the problem. It had to do with the driver selected on the apple. So Mac's aren't all perfect. With windows you just get to use the last driver you installed, but with apple you actually have to look for a different driver and add that one to the list. In this case I used just "Epson" apparently, which gives the exact name of the printer in the printer menu. SO I added another printer and chose "Epson USB instead". This listed a new printer called "SP 2100". And this one DID print images.

By the way, the matte and photo black cartridges will determine which papers you can select from the printer driver menu, they won't just disable the printer from printing images, only an empty cartridge will do that, or selecting an incorrect driver as I just proved...

Recently I acquired an Epson 2100 from a colleague. I installed the

software and all the updates immediately and hooked it up.

Then I decided to make a test print. I made all the adjustments as per

usual. I set photo glossy paper (it didn't show a driver for premium

glossy because there is a 3rd party matte black ink in there).

Unfortunately when I pushed the print button, the status monior came

up and almost immediately stopped the print. Teh status just said "-",

nothing more. I pushed "start print" but within seconds it would stop

again.

Then I tried to hook it up on my pc, and made a quick print on plain

paper. No problems.

So I tried again with my mac: same story as before... no print...

I did perform nozzle checks and head cleans, and the printer has

nicely alligned nozzles. The test print prints out fine, both on mac

and PC.

Can anybody tell me what is going on, and/or how I can solve this problem?

I used the 6x17. I don't see any problems with film flatness.

But I do think it imbalancs the camera (a shen hao 45)

Ah, well... I admit out front, I do not have either of the software or the R2400 for that matter. But honestly, I don't think that Epson's advanced B&W is different from another B&W plugin, except that it makes it more difficult to get the result you want.

I would imagine that when you convert an image to B&W (or when you have a B&W image) that you need to make sure that this image is neutral(!), then in Epson's advanced B&W you can change the tint if you want to. AGain, I don't have the software, but I imagine this is how it works. If you tint it before using Epson's software (which should be the last step in the print process), I think you may be correcting against your own settings.

Personally I prefer to create my image to my liking the way it should be. After that I should only have to push print (assuming I use the right settings that result in an accurate printout of what is on my screen).

This is why a calibrated monitor is so important, and why it is so important to know what settings your printer need to provide an accurate print.

Thanks for those replies guys, as for why I think this unit is handy, is because of the bellows compensation! It gives you the lighting compensation needed for your focusing. Something I haven't found on other calculators or tables. Also I think it is more practical as it doesn't make you guess as to what your coverage is once you calculated your DOF. Instead it lets you focus on teh items you want within the field and then tells you what the f value should be.

Ah, I just found the view camera store, where I could pay with paypal, and they provide reasonably priced shipping options, like EMS global express, which is way more affordable than UPS or Fedex.

 

The price of the calculator is a little higher but teh total is still cheaper than Calumet UK (who ofcourse replaces the $ sign for a ? sign thereby doubling the price, an dby the way don't have it in stock)

I read the bob wheeler review of the Rodenstock calculator and I

think it will be very handy indeed. However, I also noticed that it

is absolutely impossible to find it anywhere on the internet!

Can anyone tell me where I can buy one?

 

Oh some extra information, I live in the UK, so if someone knows

wheer I can buy them there, great! ALternatively a US seller would

do as well, but so far I have found only 2: Calumet and B&H.

I should also add that I will go on holiday soon and therefore I

would like to have it either within a few days here in the UK or

otherwise send to an address in Taiwan as I will be there next week

onward. The problem is that BH doesn't ship to an address other than

the billing address or a US address, no other shipping addresses are

allowed (which in my opinion is daft and simply discrimination of

non-americans!). Calumet charges over 50 US$ for shipping this tiny,

flimsy little flat calculator to Taiwan, ofcourse allowing only the

next day UPS option. I know there are other ways, such as US

airmail, or UPS global express. BH already quoted 25US$ for

shipping, where Calumet charges 52 US$!!!

 

So does anyone know of a shop that does not discriminate non-

americans and does not charge a fortune for shipping a small peice

of metal (or plastic, I don't know what material it is)?

Pete,

 

Yeah, you are right.

I know polaroid is what will give me the best answer (as it is made using the same camera I use for making the photo). It is just that it might be a bit expensive.

I was planning to bracket, with, say 0.5 stops.

 

As a side note, when I say guys, I obviously mean men as well as women. This is just how things are said in England: women are also referred to as guys, they use it with eachother as well...

So ladies, don't worry, I wasn't addressing my questions just to the boys :O))

1/3 stop would be fine with me. It is just that I read about a G2 or G3 that was 1 stop off, which ofcourse is not acceptable. Correctable, but not acceptable

Pete,

It is the mimicking of the ISO speed I am concerned with ofcourse. When I set the ISO speed setting on my 10D, the metering will give the right exposure for any Apperture/shutter combination that will give a correct exposure at the ISO setting I set on my camera.

Sure you are right that sensors have different light sensitivity and that ISO values have to be manipulated using software/hardware. But most manufacturers could do this better than they do now. It is just a matter of calibration. Not that difficult with software.

 

Also, there is a reason why I seek advice from these forums: To prevent having to buy 5-10 Digital Cameras and returning them because the behaviour is not acceptable to me.

 

Furthermore, I thought my english was quite clear on why I want this: To preview an image before I use Large Format Film. In Layman english: I want to see if certain aperture/shutter combinations give a good exposure for ISO 100 (or 200 or 400, or 50, or whatever I want to use for film). If I can see if the results are over/under exposed, I know I should take a different aperture/shutter combination on the LF camera. Simple as that. Gees! Is that so difficult to understand? Guess you never work with Large Format (or Medium Format for that matter...)

Guys,

 

I want to have some warm up filters. I already have a lee system,

but I wonder if their polyester filter sets will fit in the holder,

or if I have to buy the gel snap on holder on top of the filter.

Also I wonder about the quality when compared to the resin warm up

filters. I suppose you get what you pay for, but is it decent, or

should I just go for the resin stuff? Really I think an 81A and 81B

would be sufficient for the moment, but the polyester sets sell for

less than one resin filter costs.

any suggestions?

Hmm, if they deviate from the standard, it is no longer a standard is it? ISO stands for International Standard Organisation. In teh case of Photography, an ISO (or ASA) value will give you a light sensitivity that will always require the same amount of light to expose properly. It doesn't matter if this is B&W film, Colour slide, negative, or digital sensor. A standard is a standard. So if ISO 100 requires a shutter speed of 1/125 at an aperture of 5.6 for a certain light condition, it means that any combination of shutter speed and aperture, resulting in the same exposure as 1/125 at f5.6, will give you the correct exposure. This is regardless of the medium you are using. Film (B&W, slides, negative) and sensors get classified to a certain light sensitivity, i.e. ISO value, which will define a certain combination of shutter speeds and apertures that will always give the right exposure for that light sensitivity (ISO value). Hence film is classified as ISO 100, 200, 400, etc. This allows people to select film with a certain light sensitivity.

 

Since I read on several forums that Digital Compacts tend to deviate from the standard for their so called "ISO setting", when compared to traditional professional film SLRs, I wanted to know how large the deviation was between Digital Compact and more decently calibrated equipment (EOS 10D, 1V, 1N, Olympus OM-1N, light meters).

 

Hmm, unfortunately the cameras you mention Godfrey, are all rather high end for Digital Compact and leaning towards DSLR. I was looking more in the direction of Canon A95 or Fuji F810, something like that. If someone happened to have tested such a small compact, and can tell me about it, great!

 

I guess I can always borrow my girlfriend's F810 and check it against my 10D. If they compare, I will just buy the same camera (I worked with it before and it is actually quite nice, except for battery which runs out after a day's shooting)

 

 

PS Bob: you may consider the Rebel XT as a Digital Compact, but I think most of us still consider it a D-SLR, i.e. not Compact... If I want DSLR, I will use my 10D.

Guys,

 

I'm looking for a Digital Compact with reliable metering. With that

I don't mean a DC that produces shots that are always well exposed,

but I mean a camera where ISO 100 is in fact ISO 100. Many DCs tend

to use ISO settings, just for reference, but really, when compared

with a good SLR they turn out to be way off. I don't want. Reason is

that I will be using it to preview any shots I will make with Medium

and Large Format Cameras (until I mastered metering with a light

meter).

Hence I need a DC that is well calibrated, has manual, apperture and

shutter priority. It would be nice if the camera is small with a

decently large screen (1.8" or so). B&W would also be a bonus, but

is not a must.

Does anyone know what DC has these features?

Guys,

 

I'm sure there has been a lot of discussion about portrait lenses

(though I can find only a couple). I can get hold of a 210mm Symmar

S fairly cheaply and I was wondering if this would make a good

portrait lens for my Shen Hao 4x5. I am willing to consider a

portait lens I can use for more general use as well. Would 210mm be

a good choice?

well, I finally got the right III-B filter. Those guys really don't know what they are selling! They were holding one in their hand and said it was 58mm. There is no III-B with 58mm thread I told them, but they insisted. Despite I send a picture from their own website, showing that this III-B had "58XL2 written all over it! I told them to hold the "58mm" for me so they can send me that one once mine got back to them. Some dumbass clown thought he was clever and tried to send me the III-C, which they had listed as 67mm. Not realising that this is a different filter, I called them just to make sure they returned the right filter. As it happens it was waiting to be posted (the guy hadn't got around to doing that the evening before) so I told them to talk to all their colleagues, get the III-B for the 58XL and send me THAT one. They apparently think that all filters are all the same, UV, III-B, ND grad. No research into their own products. What an idiots! Well, at least they did send me the right filter, but only because I told them I demanded that particular filter (thanks to you guys ofcourse pointing out what the right filter would be for me).

 

For anyone who is concerned, they are called Ffordes (www.ffordes.com) and are located in the UK, where (no offence to some of the not so dumb brits) everyone seem to have missed their appointment with god for a set of brains.

where can I get a wet mounting kit for the 4990 (preferably in Europe)?

Since I am a beginner in LF, and also with using light meters, I want to protect myself against my lack of knowledge. Since I am planning to get a Digital Compact anyway (just to have something simple and small when I am not seriously making photos), I thought it might be useful to take my light measurements, input them into the DC, and see if the result comes out ok. I know that the lcd will be small, and I know that the image quality won't be great etc, but it will give me an indication if my shot is over or under exposed.

Zone system in combination with light metering is nice, but if you have never used the zone system before, you will make mistakes , which will be costly with LF, plus that you can't redo the shot once you left the area (which you need to do to develop your photos). Also I my understanding is that the zone system is very powerful in control when doing B&W, but I will mostly be shooting velvia. You can't adjust the processing for velvia, not the way it works for B&W.

 

Thus we come back to my problem: ensuring a well exposed shot. If all else fails, I will take along my DSLR, but if I can do without, I prefer that. Once I got some experience I will be using just a light meter and some zone system reference cards or whatever, but not this year...

 

So, once more. Who knows of a DC with manual controls and has a reliable ISO value?

I was wondering about using a digital compact for light metering.

The advantage is that you can see the results directly on an LCD,so

you can make a guestimation if the settings are the right ones.

However, I also know that many DC's do not have a reliable ISO

setting. With that I mean that when compared to film, the ISO

setting of a DC could be off with half a stop or maybe even more.

Does anyone know of a decent, but not too expensive, small DC, that

matches ISO settings with those of film, and is capable of

displaying a histogram? (this last part isn't really necessary when

you can see the results on a screen).

I already have a Canon 10D, which would be reliable, but is too big

and heavy to carry with my LF equipment (and doesn't do spot

metering by the way).

I am actually thinking about using a separate light meter and check

the results on a DC while I am still learning to use both the light

meter and LF.

Suggestions?

Yeah, I just found out that ken rockwell tried the 4990 as well and he prefers this one over the artixscan 1800f. Now I wonder how this scanner holds up scanning 6x17 slides. I'm kinda assuming I have to make my own film holder.

 

As a side question. Some people talking about glassless scanning. HAs anyone tried to remove the glass plate from the scanner and see if it produces better results?

How about wet scanning? Somewhere I read this is possible (though you risk making your scanner very dirty) and it results in even better scans. Is this true?

Since I will be using a Large Format camera soon, I was wondering

what scanner would give me the best price/performance ration.

I was thinking about the Epson 4990, which is supposed to be very

good indeed for its price.

Recently I saw an offer of a microtek Artixscan 1800F for 800GBP

(please remember that the UK always is twice as expensive as the US

except for european products).

The problem I might have with the 1800F is that I don't know if I

can scan 6x17 panoramas with it. I was very much under the

impression that it cannot. Ofcourse I could use the 8x10" glass

tray, but that would give me newton rings (unles I make it wet

ofcourse, wich will foul up the scanner as you use a slot in the

scanner rather than put it on top)

Any suggestions? I don't scan many 35mm, mostly MF and LF.

ICE or something similar would be very handy to have.

This is an interesting discussion actually... I just got a Large Format Camera, which in theory would blow most DSLRs away for detail. Colour, colour depth and dynamic range depends on film used ofcourse. I wouldn't classify the 20D as better than 35mm I think, but for most people I guess it is thus close that you can't notice. I too plan to replace all my 35mm film SLRs and my 10D for the 5D when it comes out. But I will also get a scanner for my MF and LF slides. Unless you go to digital backs, you cannot beat MF for detail with current range of digitals (including the 5D and the 1DsMk2

Guys,

 

I own an Epson stylus photo 950 printer (I think the US variant is

the 960). Recently I am starting to run out of ink. One of the

cartridges is already empty so now I cannot print anymore (epson

does not allow you to continue printing, even text, if one cartridge

is empty). The others are pretty low as well (I guess I use my ink

quite efficiently with all tones used regularly). Rather than buy

new epson ink, I was thinking about buying a new R1800 for colour

printing and keep this one and dedicate it to B&W. I was thinking

about getting teh Lyson Quad-black neutral ink set, and probably as

bulk CIS system to save myself some money on the long run. However,

I first need to flush the channels. Lyson has cleaning cratridges,

but I don't really want to buy 7 of them because they are 10GBP

each! I was wondering if it is possible to buy just one cleaning

cartridge and use that one for flushing all channels one by one. Is

this possible? I understood that I need to perform form feeds and

nozzle checks until the nozzle checks come out clear. If this is

possible that would safe me a sh!t load of money on cleaning

cartridges that i will use only once anyway...

Hmm, I wonder if your link is a printin error. If you look at this link:

 

http://www.schneideroptics.com/info/ads_&_brochures/pdf/large_format_lenses.pdf

 

you will see at page 12 in the bottom centre of the page (this page also shows image circles) a small table where the Super Angulon 6.8/90 uses a III-B filter with a threat size of 82mm. My filter measures 82mm thread size on the rear end, it also says on th rim that it is a III-B. It was also advertised as a III-B. On the protective case is written III-B 90XL, so I guess I have a Schneider III-B filter with a thread size of M82.

 

Anyway, I use it on a Nikon SW 90mm f8 lens, not a schneider lens. I emailed the seller if I could swap it with the other one as the other one has a photo on the website that states 58XL III-B on the protective case, so I guess this is a M67 thread III-B.

Since there are multiple sizes (at least two as I have now proven), he should really have stated the thread size on the wbepage. It is not that it lacks space or anything...

I bought a SHen Hao 4x5, with a 6x17 back, so I would expect to need the CF .