mike_earussi1

<p>I sell landscapes and have two different philosophies, one set I crop to fit standard readymade frame sizes that can be economically bought at Michaels, and the other set I crop to whatever looks best for the photo, for those who don't mind paying for the extra cost that specialized framing entails. I offer both and let the customers choose.</p>

<p>The A7s has been rated as having the best low light image quality and AF available. And if you're not needing to make huge prints the 12mp sensor should be sufficient. With so many low light challenges you're facing it would certainly be the best camera for you.</p>

<p>You might want to give them a discount if they're willing to put your business cards up, since your photo in a public business is a kind of free advertising.</p>

<p>This is the closest thing I've seen to an explanation:</p> <p> <p>but with continued dslr advances I don't think that MF backs are long for this world.</p>

<p>Contarex is a really rare lens, supposedly the best Zeiss ever made. If it's just the coating and not the glass that's scratched it might be worth seeing what the repair cost is.</p>

<p>I've owned many Rolleiflexes over the years and don't recall any of them having shutter problems by having it cocked, which is very common when there's film still in the camera. And the self-timer I didn't use enough to pay much attention to.<br> As for the four element f3.5 Tessars and Xenars, on the cord and earlier model flexes, they are just as good in the center as the five and six element Planars and Xenotars. It's only on the edges where the more complex lenses are better.</p>

<p>I suspect your main problem is shooting at f32. "Shininess" or specular highlights require fine detail which you're destroying by stopping down so much. The proper way to shoot small objects is by using focus stacking, where you take a series of separate shots using f8, which doesn't destroy sharpness, focused on different parts of the object and then combine them into one shot via a software stacking program. </p> <p>This creates a picture not only with a large depth of field, but will also provide the high sharpness and contrast you need to make your jewelry look its best.</p> <p>If you're unfamiliar with focus stacking, just type it in Google and there are any number of articles and videos on how to do it. I use Photoshop for my stacking program since I subscribe to CC, but there are many more stand-alone stacking programs available.</p>

<p>I had an old Leica 135mm Elmar like that and used it as my soft focus lens. Of course, I also only paid $50 for it. So if he's "giving the lens away" I'd say go for it if you just want something to play with, otherwise pass. </p>

<p>Two comments:<br> 1. See if you can just add some more ram to your motherboard. This would be the cheapest fix in the short term. <br> 2. get the kit lens and then look at the older non-AF Nikon lenses from the 70s and 80s-- excellent optics but much cheaper than modern AF lenses. </p>

<p>A good drum scan will pick up <em>everything</em> on the negative. Even the best Apo enlarger lens loses about 20-30% of the information on the negative (I know because I've measured the loss in my own darkroom--I had my own color darkroom for 10 years before digital came along). Besides a good inkjet print has much better DR and color than even the best wet print can make. </p>

<p>Michael, sorry I really didn't keep detailed notes on what I did (too many steps anyway to keep track of), just put it in ACR and had fun.</p>

<p>A fun image, thanks for posting:</p> <p><img src="http://m9.i.pbase.com/g9/17/763317/2/160915419.JssMy3dT.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="600" /></p>

<p>There is an adapter. But the resolution of the old lenses won't make the best of the digital sensor.</p>

<p>I took this next to the lodge a sunset: http://www.mikeearussi.com/p359009496/hf75663f#hf75663f<br> but as the previous poster said, just wander around and get a feel for what you want. </p>

<p>Dan has a good point. The Pentax 645 150 f2.8 sells for under $100 on eBay, which is probably cheaper than whatever adapter you'll find.</p>

<p>Don't know about yours, but mine defaults wide open.</p>

<p>Coming from a Pentax 67 and 645 background I can say from experience that they are built really tuff and don't break easily. So if you buy one that is in good working condition it will probably stay that way for a while. But if you're worried you can also buy one from KEH which has a 6 mt warranty.</p>

<p>I own one for a Sigma camera and it does not have an aperture ring, you'd only be able to shoot it wide open. I use quite a few older lenses on my a6000 but they're all manual focus and so all have aperture rings. So if you're wanting both a macro lens that would work on both your Nikon and Sony you'd need to buy an older non AF Nikon (or third party like Tamron) macro from the 1980s or earlier.</p>

<p>Both Nikon and Sony sensors have about 2 1/2 stops more DR than Canon, so if your various lighting modifications don't work you can always rent a better camera.</p>

<p>Hope the bison wasn't hurt.</p>

<p>I've shot 30 year old color film successfully that had been kept in a freezer, but unless it has been continuously frozen (and is of a slow speed) film will be too fogged to use.</p>

<p>On the Sigma forum at dpreview those who've used it love it regardless of the camera it's used on. No reason it shouldn't work fine on yours.</p>

<p>Lenses that are sharp in the corners used on an APS-C may not be on a FF, because no adapter fits perfectly flat. So the greater the angle it has to cover, the greater the edge misalignment will be. </p>

<p>Rollei attachments come in three sizes, Bay 1, 2 and 3. If you can't get yours on, you might have the wrong size. For instance, the early f3.5 Tessars and Xenars take a Bay 1 and the later f3.5 Planars and Xenotars take a Bay 2.</p>

<p>How about the fixed lens Fuji 6x9 rangefinders? Great optics, light weight and not that expensive anymore.<br> http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=fuii+6x9&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR2.TRC1.A0.H0.Xfuji+6x9.TRS0&_nkw=fuji+6x9&_sacat=0<br> Koni- Omegas are great too, but they are also heavy. </p> <p> </p>