harry_pluta3

I recently purchased a Canon S50 for my wife as a replacement for her Pentax P&S. Even though I am a long time Nikon owner, she wanted a camera that would slip into her purse, had a sliding lens cover, and was simple to use. The Canon has met this challenge and is a good compromise camera. The cons: the wide lens setting isn't wide enoug, the long setting is too short. Other then that we have snapped some very nice pictures with it.

 

-harry

I cannot answer your question regarding the D70, I am trying to decide for myself. However I can comment on the 70-300ED. I have been shooting that lens for a couple of years now and really like it. On an F5 the focus is very fast and the ergonomics are very good. Of the longer zooms it rated ok at photodo; http://www.photodo.com/prod/lens/detail/NiAF70-300_4-56DED-446.shtml; and personnaly I have made some nice pictures with it. The biggest drawback for me is the roatting barrel during focus, makes use of filters a little harder. If I had the money and didn't object to the weight I would love a 80-200 f/2.8, but for my needs this one works well. ( Plus with the D70 the long end in effect becomes a 450mm f5.6!

 

-harry

Thanks Peter,

 

This is a very timely review. I just purchased a Canon S50 for my wife and she is interested in being able to "print instantly" with it. It sounds like this might be a good supplement to my venrable old Epson 1270.

 

Regards,

-harry

Greg,

 

My 85/1.8 is currently one of my favorite film lenses, even though it is a little short. I can only image how much more I will like it mounted on a DSLR with the 1.5x factor. Should become a killer portrait lens.

 

-harry

I've been using a Polaroid SprinScan 4000 for a few years now and have nothing but good things to say about it. I do use the full retail version of Silverfast's scanning software rather then the bundled software that came with the Polaroid.

 

-harry

Eric,

 

A nice option for your last lens is the Nikkor 85mm with a set of Kenko AF extension tubes. These work flawlessly on an F5, but I've not tested them yet on a digital body.

 

-harry

I feel this is a thread I can weigh in on. Over the last 7 years I have gone from using an older 4x5 Sinar, to a used Pentax 645, to a new Mamiya RZ67, to my trusty F5, and am now looking to finally go to either a D100 or a D70. Here are my observations.

 

The Sinar - Pros: prints from 4x5 negatives look good even when scanned on a flat bed scanner. Ability to shift and tilt both front and rear standards allow pinpoint accuracy of plain of focus, you must work very slowly and carefully. Cons: Large and bulky ( although it did all fit in a backpack, requires a seperate light meter, lens cost is very high, film cost and processing is very high, you must work very slowly and carefully.

 

The Pentax 645 - Pros: Nice amount of automation, reasonable lens prices (used), decent size in a backpack. Cons: Not much difference in negative size between 6.45 and 35mm, scanner cost very high, weight, no shifts or tilts.

 

Mamiya RZ67 - Pros: Very large negatives compared to 35mm, amazing lenses, excellent automation. Cons: Cost, size, weight, shifts and tilts limited to special adapter, cost of scanner. Requires either a special prism or a handheld light meter.

 

Nikon F5 - Pros: Lots of lenses available, remarkable exposure control, auto-focus, mirror lock-up, decent scanners at reasonable prices, lots of film to choose from. Cons: Price, weight, still film based; lots of issues with grain, artifacts, and dust when scanning

 

D100 / D70 - TBD but I think the main pro is no longer having that intermediate step of scanning, I can use my existing Nikon lenses, I can carry a spare film body if needed, uses same basic exposure CPU as my F5, auto-focus, I can dump straight to my computer. Cons: TBD no mirror lock-up!, still bigger then I would like, but much smaller then the F5.

 

These are just my observations as a hobbiest. The truth is a camera that you will take everywhere you go will serve you much better then one which sits at home because it is too much of a hassle to carry with.

 

Best regards,-harry

Looks like the Canon S50 is the winner for her. The real problem is now this exercise has me looking at a DSLR to replace my film SLR!

 

Thanks for all your help,

-harry

I have used the MC-20 on an F5 and while it is a little on the short side, it works very well. In my case I wanted the long exposure feature of the MC-20. It is an expensive little bugger, but you can usually find a deal on them on ebay.

 

Hope this helps,

-harry

I appreciate the feedback so far. I figured that the digicams would not get the job done, seemed like it was too good to be true. So that leaves me with either a pre-owned D100 or a new D70 as possibilities, the D1 is too heavy, weight is one of the reasons I wanted to move from the F5. This actually is not a bad solution as I can keep my little FG as a film backup camera and share lenses. ( Hard to believe this exercise started out as a replacement for my wife's point and shoot! )

 

I realize that none of the digital solutions match what I was once able to do in a wet darkroom, but how would the output of one of these cameras compare to film that has been scanned at 4000 dpi and printed on my Epson? The big struggle there is dust, artifacts in the shadows, dust, scratches, negative to positive conversion algorithims, and dust!

 

Again, many thanks for the input,

-harry

Hi all,

 

I am a hobbiest mainly doing landscapes, still-lifes and occasionally

portraits, sports photos, and "puppy" pictures. I am thinking about

selling my Nikon F5 (talk about your low milage camera!) and moving

to the digital capture domain. I've done as much reading as I can

find, but I wanted to hear from folks who are using some of these

cameras ( and possibly others ) first hand. I really like the small

size of the Coolpix models, but the D100 felt comfortable as soon as

I picked it up.

 

All of my existing lenses are Nikkor D type's but other then a couple

of primes none are very fast, also the widest I have is a 24mm

prime. I do have several nice options for the F5, but other then the

remote cord none of these will work on the D100.

 

I figure I can sell my F5 body for enough to afford a D100 body or I

could sell off my body, lenses, and such and pick up a "totally

loaded" 5700 or 8700. ( Especially since the 5700 is sporting a

$150.00 rebate! )

 

For the past several years I have been shooting film and scanning it

on a Polaroid SprintScan 4000. These shots are then worked in

Photoshop and printed on an Epson 1270. My question is are any of

the current digital cameras a suitable replacement for my current

workflow?

 

Thanks for your thoughts,

-harry

On a recent outing, my wife mislaid her favorite point and shoot film

camera. I would like to replace this with a nice digital P&S but

know next to nothing about them. We seldom blow up any images made

with her camera above 5x7 with the odd 8x10 of really great shots.

 

I showed her a Nikon Coolpix 5400, but she wanted something that

would slip comfortably in her pocket. That said I guess it will be

important to have a camera that protects the lens when turned off.

 

FWIW the camera we are replacing was a weatherproof Pentax IQ Zoom

with a pretty nice zoom range ( I think it was 28-110mm ).

 

Finally the camera must be easy to use, but it would be nice if it

had a manual mode so I can "play" when we are out without the SLRs.

 

Thanks so much in advance,

-Harry

I am a Diafine convert and like Gene I shoot T-Max at 50 for most things, at 64 on really bright contrasty days. I also have found that Pan-F+ at 50 is really nice for portrait work under strobes.

 

Enjoy,

BIll,

 

I am using XP with a JVC 3000U, with Ulead's VideoStudio, and a SoundBlaster Audioligy card's Firewire port. What I found was I needed to select the correct video driver inside the software, in my case the MS driver set, not the TI set? Once I fugured that out and replace my hard drive with a 7200rpm model it is working great.

 

Let us know what you find,

-harry

Nico,

 

Were you sure to shield your screen from any ambient room light? The first time I did my screen I had a bright overhead light on and the results were too bright.

 

Also, be sure to remove the Gamma command from your startup file.

 

Hope this helps,

My experiance is with scanning in mind rather then wet printing. I have gotten really good results from Tmax100 and Fan F+ both rated at _EI 50_, yep. ( On a bright day I will rate TMax100 at EI 64 ).

 

This gives me good seperation from one end of the Zone system to the other. Now you need to keep in mind that my scanner seems to prefer a denser negative over a thinner one and if I was wet printing I would not go near as dense.

 

Hope this helps,

Joe,

 

I was looking just for the camcorder at around $600.00. I ended up spending the $800.00 and buying the JVC GR-DV3000U, nice piece of gear. I did also replace my home computer, but that was another issue and can be written off as a buiness expense. Right now I am working my way thru Ulead's VideoStudio.

 

Thanks to all,

-harry

Pretty good summary. As someone who has been selling cameras on Ebay since January of '98 I would say that if the seller is not willing to offer an unconditional return policy, pass on it, period!

 

JMHO,

I carry one in my case as a back up to an F5. My last vaction trip I found that it makes a nice walking around camera as well. My meter seems to be dead on.

 

Enjoy,

Can anyone comment on the JVC GR-DV3000u? I know it is stretching the dollars a bit, but with the fast lens and 1600x1200 still capture it meets my needs for under $800.00.

 

Thanks,

My wife and I have decided to upgrade our old Panasonic VHS-C

camcorder to a newer unit. Our budget is the $400-$600 range. The

issue with the Panasonic is picture quality, unless you have a person

filling the frame it is pretty hard to tell who they are, of course

this is a very old camera.

 

What I really want to be able to do is 1) capture my daughter's

concerts (decent sound), ice shows (low light / image stability), and

softball games (fast action), 2) record our vacations, 3) record the

pitchers I coach so I can show them their motion in a still frame /

step-by-step mode, 4) copy the videos I make to DVD, and 5) replace

our point & shoot fim camera, 2 to 3 megapixel would be nice. The

last 2 items are real "wish list", but it never hurts to ask.

 

I looked at an "open-box" Sony DCR-TRV530 today for $550.00, but the

kid at the store insisted that I would be happier with a Canon miniDV

at $600.00 claiming the picture and lens quality was much higher.

What are my other options?

 

Can anyone here help out? I know my way around every type of film

camera, but am really lost in video land.

 

Thanks and best regards,

Two years ago I was on a bicycling excursion with my old Anniversary Speed Graphic in my backpack. I had just set up a shot of a grove of trees that was interesting but not exceptional. As I pulled my head out from under the dark cloth an elderly gentleman approched me and said he had carried one all over Europe during WWII. I told him about my years in the service when we transitioned from the Super Speed Graphic to Nikon 35mm gear. We talked for a good 15 minutes or so and when he left I turned around to take the shot and the light had changed so that the shot was perfectly illuminated. Still one of my favorites.

TJ,

 

I have both an older Jobo 4x5 tank and loader (not the expert version) and Combi-Plan tanks. The Jobo is a left over from the days when I had a Jobo processor and did my own E-6 as well as B/W. I replaced it with the HP Combi-Plan tanks when I went inversion. The main differences are the loader system for each and the amount of chemistry the tanks use. For 6 sheets the Combi-Plan requires about 1 liter, the Jobo requires almost 1.5 liters. IMHO, the loader on the Jobo is easier to use on a workbench in a dark room, the COmbi-Plan loader (really a guide plate) is easier to use inside a changing tent.

 

I have used both with Diafine and with Photograhers Formulary BW-2 with excellent results.

 

Hope this helps,

Elizabeth,

 

I use diafine with T-Max100 & now with Pan F+. I develop my negatives for scanning, not wet printing, so I do go for a little denser negative. What I have found with TMax is in order to get the densities I want, I am exposing at an EI of 50-64. This happens to be the same EI I ended up with when developing TMax in T-Max developer. Pan F+ in diafine seems to work fine at an EI of 50.

 

I found these EIs by shooting a step wedge and then scanning it./ The correct EI is where I can see gradiation from the lightest patches all the way to the darkest patches with no blocking up on either end. I am able to then print these scan to produce very rich prints.

 

Anyhow, thats what works for me, your milage may vary,

I use an old 90mm / f8 Caltar (Super Angulon) and it works fine without dropping the bed. Any wider and you would ahve a problem.

 

-harry