timbowles

Mark- you're right. I'm trying to justify spending that money..... We'll see how the reviewers like the MKII. Something that I question is the reduction in pixel size to that of the old 20Dish cameras. I thought bigger pixels were better, and am surprised they've done this to get the higher number in the MKII- obviously the trade-off was worth it....

Scott, you make some excellent points, as much as I hate to admit it ;-) ...... Now, where am I going to find that money?!

 

Tim

Dan- I'm in Canada, hence the $ difference. I've been in no rush to purchase a DSLR (and still won't be for a few months) but have been looking at the possiblity for quite some time, as you can see. Essentially I have been waiting for Canon to come out with a DSLR I'd be satisfied with, which it seems to have achieved in the 5D MKII, but the 50D just seems so close...... I'm pretty much a film shooter in 35mm, MF and LF and have been exploring that for the past few years and have been in no rush to "go digital". I've come to realize that for color "convenience" (ie 35mm size) photography, I'd be happier with the current DSLR technology vs what I've been getting scanning my slides.

 

Tim

I'm curious about the 5D MKII vs the 50D- Is the 5D really worth $2000 more than the 50D? When you get to the

bones of it, I see the differences as:

- full frame vs cropped (for those who tend to shoot wide vs long)

- total MP of final file to allow greater enlargement (but how much actually? 2x?)

- iso range (is the 5D high iso performance that good to make it worthwhile, or the ability to shoot at 50 vs 100? Is it

less noisy than the 50D up to 3200, the the expandable 6400 and 12800? If better. are there on-line comparisons to

be found?)

- ability to shoot HD video (a gimmick, as far as I'm concerned)

 

Am I off-based with this comparison? I know it's the old 5D vs 20D arguement all over again but it seems that the 2

ends of the spectrum have come alot closer together now. I never considered buying a 5D because of its lack of

sensor cleaner (a big concern I had) but now the MKII seems to have everything I'd want in a DSLR. But... is it $2000

better than the 50D? I'm looking to potentially buy my first and last (for a looong time) DSLR.

 

Tim

I was wondering how I would use my ultra modern Canon 580EXII Speedlight with my ultra dated Yashica Mat 124, or

even my LF lens in a (relatively) new and working copal shutter. I know I have to plug into the X sync (assuming

it's working), but with what kind of cord?

 

Thanks,

Tim

Cool- thanks!

 

Tim

Hi-

 

Is it possible to lock flash output on this unit once a an FEL pop is made on a grey card (i.e. to maintain the correct

exposure in a sequence of photos), or does a new FEL pop need to be done for each exposure?

 

Thanks,

Tim

Thanks for the in-depth response. I actually have the book you mentioned, and I agree it's quite good. It was on his recommendations that I chose my EI of 200-320 (although I did find him quite ambiguous in his statements on how to rate this film). If you have better/other suggestions, I'm certainly open, so I don't waste any more film. I see you use the IR filter, which I won't be doing. I like the Cokin 001 (light yellow # 8) and 002 (light orange #21) effects, depending what I'm shooting. I was just wishfully thinking I might get away with stretching out what I have left of this film. I guess I just have to plan a few days of shooting very carefully to maximize every frame. I got into film only a couple years ago, so EIR and HIE are the first films I've had to watch (that I've valued) die out. It's hard to accept.

 

Tim

Yup- they look like the other photos I've done with the light yellow filter. I'll call the lab, but I doubt they even run AR-5 chemicals. Thanks. What do you think about shooting the film over a protracted period of time like this? I've heard that you get a magenta shift if the film is left at room temp for very long, so I put the whole camera in the fridge. It seemed to work, so I think I'll continue to do it, rather than blowing a roll. I've only got about 15 rolls left, so I have to make it last. I wonder how long it can sit in the fridge like that......

I didn't get a color shift, just dark. I must have just metered wrong. Weird- this has worked quite reliably at ISO 200 for bright and 320 for blazing sun in the past. I have used a light yellow filter with no adjustment and a light orange with an extra 1 1/2 stops exposure succesfully. The problem must be in my handheld metering technique and filter adjustments (I never use on-camera metering for slide film).

It was done E-6

I just got a roll of EIR back from the lab I shot over the 1st week of

October/07 in Utah.

 

On day one of the trip I realized I forgot to change the ISO setting on my

incident lightmeter from 100 to the 200- 320 I use for EIR, depending on the

amount of light present. I left the film in the camera for the week I was using

it down there, with no special attention taken regarding cooling, etc. It went

through the carry-on xray coming back to Canada, sat around for a couple days

still in camera (because I didn't have a chance to finish the roll), then went

into the fridge in a ziplock for 3 weeks while waiting for some sun. Last week

the sun poked out for a couple days, so I took the camera out of the fridge and

let it sit 24 hours in the ziplock before proceeding to finish the roll. I then

froze it (in a ziplock) for a few days and took it into be processed.

 

So what I have are the 1st 5 shots perfectly exposed (which I was expecting to

be 1 to 1 1/2 stops overexposed), and the rest 1 to 1 1/2 stops underexposed.

Would this be due to IR availability at high altitude (I thought it would be

more, thus overexposing, if anything), or due to the protracted period over

which the film was used, and not kept cool? I think my metering and personal EI

are correct, because I've tested this film (albeit only a couple rolls due to

price). Could it be the IR availability at this time of year, especially the

shots I took up here in Manitoba? Granted, some of the later film was shot under

very light cloud, but I've done that before using an ISO of 200 and been o.k. An

important note is that color rendition is exactly what I was expecting to see-

none of the magenta shift I've heard EIR experiences when not kept refridgerated

or shot and processed quickly.

 

Thanks,

Tim

The photoglow link is not responding. It did when I first tried it a few days ago, but now it won't (when I have more time to look into it). Dang!

I am currently working on this as well. So far I'm at a personal EI of 100 in diluton H for 10 minutes. The neg looks ok, but I haven't contact printed it yet.

If it is EIR or HIE, DO NOT GET IT HAND INSPECTED! There's no anti-halation layer on either, and must be kept in the dark, and loaded/unloaded in the dark. If they open a tin at the airport, it's shot.

just use the 25. then you can focus normally, and can see what you're doing through the viewfinder. I wouldn't get hung up on using a meter either- it'll make it more complicated than necessary.

normal focus. the majority of what you're capturing is non-IR (that's how I understand it,anyway). I've used normal focus, and it has worked fine.

I have found good success at ISO 200 in "sunny" conditions, and about 320 in "super bright contrasty sun". I don't think I'd go less than 200 unless it was bright cloud, but then you're losing alot of IR, so why shoot the pricey stuff anyway? I don't think I'd go higher than 400, max, either. But keep in mind, as with other color slide film, it's always better to underexpose if unsure. I agree that the #12 yellow is the filter to use, and you don't have to worry too much about filter factor. I've used an orange filter with some interesting results, and have seen green do some interesting things as well.

I ignore my camera's meter as well- I have found through bracketing that if I rate HIE at 200 using a 25 filter and the sunny 16 rule, I get the most printable negs. I will often take an extra shot at ISO 400 if there's alot of foliage or it's super dazzling sun as a back-up. *** I also minus 3 stops for the filter, and as mentioned before, it's not a true 3 stop reduction in light but it eases my calcultations *** So I tend to shoot at f/16 @ 1/30 to 1/60. I develop in TMax for 6 min, agitating only once a minute though (it's pretty fragile stuff). You can see that I'm giving a heck of alot more exposure that Bob and Neil, but my development probably makes the difference. I find that if I give more exposure, there's too much white, and if you rate the film too fast, it gets too grainy. If you check out my portfolio, I made 16x20 enlargements of "Mystic Creek2" and "Connaught Beach1" and they look great and virtually grain-free from 4 feet away. I think that it is equally important to ask what developing technique is being used with this film when you're asking about how to expose it. I've seen some people rate this film at ISO 800 or more, but then develop it for 11 or 12 minutes. No real right answer, as there are many ways to use this film. you need to pick one of the suggested techniques and try it. If you don't like the result, try a different one, but you're going to have to do alot of bracketing and experimentation for your first few rolls. Once you go through a couple rolls, you'll get the hang of how it responds.

If you want to learn, then shoot slides. It's the only way to see what you've really done in camera. A print from negative film can be adjusted greatly to give you a decent print (which most labs will do- why send home crappy prints if they can improve them?). You won't know if, or to the extent this has been done. Therefore, you won't have any clue as to your exposure accuracy.

H.C.:

 

I picked up a Shen Hao 5x7 (HZX57-IIAT)and an Apo-Sironar-N 180/5.6

 

It's a thing of beauty.

 

Tim

Rob at Big Camera workshops gets another vote from me. I recently got into LF through him, and he was awesome. I will continue to buy film through him (I'm in Winnipeg).

Hmmm- not patronizing at all- It's a good question.

I'm using paper that I cut to 5x7 so as not to waste film, but it was done in the darkroom, and I did notice that a couple sheets were a bit long (crimped on the end). I thought the same thing you did. These were not the holders that had the majority of the problems though, and when I did a fix-job and re-tested I made *sure* I wasn't making that mistake again. Things generally improved, but there is just a little hint of fogging at those bottom corners still (I covered the end with black hockey tape).

 

Tim

And here's a rendition of leaks I'm getting from some plastic holders I got:

I don't have a scanner, but here's an artists rendition: