chema_perez

Thanks Robert. So I understand that the Rollei ATP will have less problem with contrast than Adox CMS 20.

Here in Belgium the light is often soft, so a contrasty emulsion is not much problem.

But anyway if I want the best range with the Rollei ATP it's better to shoot at its lower iso isn't it?

I beleve I will give it a try, I am curious if there is so much difference with Acros or Delta 100.

For what I have seen in forums it seems the Adox CMS 20 (Spur Orthopan UR) With Adotech CMS developer (Spur nanospeed) is the plus ultra for sharpnes.

 

The Rollei ATP 1.1 seems to do it well too.

 

I'd like to try one for landscape, but I beleve sharpnes is not everything.

- Does those films have good tonal range?

- what about latitude tolerance?

- Is it true that one have to shoot the ATP at 12iso if using Rollei Low Contrast? I beleve this developer is the way to go for landscape. Is there other developer that alow to use it at 32 or a more practical iso?

- Is it true the Adox CMS 20 (Spur Orthopan) is only good in sun light? not in shadow or cloudy... or night.

 

I'm new in slow films, I'd like to do some industrial landscape with the 35mm camera, only have one lens for the Mamiya 7 and I'd like to try mi new 35mm Zeiss lenses to the limit and do some 40x50cm (16x20in?) enlargements.

Hi. I alwais go to Rushlab for color negatives.

 

http://www.rushlab.be/

 

They are fine and deal with true photographers, so cuality is expected.

 

132, Boulevard Adolphe Max 1000 Bruxelles.

 

It's in the center, near the Tram station Rogier and not far from the City2.

 

For B&W I don't remember the name as I do it my self now. I remember is near the art shop Schleiper in Chaussee de Charleroi 1060 Bruxelles. This is near Place Stephanie. That was the best I found for B&W at the time.

Well. Thanks for the answers, in fact this is to confirm what I already know.

 

The thing is that in another forum, someone who actualy is a professional fotographer of arquitecture and uses LF, is claiming that not only the angle of coverage can be different depending the lens design, but also the angle of view in one same format can change!!

 

It's clear now. Thanks!

Hi. I post this in here because I supose the LF shooters have better knowlege

of these matters.

 

My dout is

 

Could two different design lenses have exact equal focal length and different

angle of view?

 

Not angle of coverge, this is a different matter. And comparing the two of them

focused at infinity as they should.

 

I ask because often we can find lenses specs with same focal and different

angles. I know that they rarely give the real focal, but if we calculate it,

would we find the mathematical corelation?

 

I've read this would be the formula:

 

angle of view = 2 * tan^-1 [(1/2 * diagnoal of format)/focal length]

 

The question is : Is this true at 100%? or is just something to give an

approximate response.

 

Thanks.

My choice for chooting at 1600 is

 

Fuji neopan 1600/D-76 Developper - some grain a bit contrasty

 

t-max 3200 @ 1600/T-max Developper - Some more grain good contrast

 

Fuji neopan 400 @ 1600/D-76 Developper - low grain hi contrast

 

It depends on what I do, if the scene have low contrast I go for the neopan 400 at 1600 (sharp and detail) or neopan 1600 (dramatic look), but to be shure to do it well in a wedding I'll go for the t-max 3200 @ 1600, I think is the one that accepts more latitude (just an opinion without tests!)

 

If I remember well, the neopan 1600 is realy a 800 iso film and the t-max 3200 is in fact a 1000 or 1200 iso.

 

The less grain you want the more contrast you will have, there is no magic film in that iso sensibility. However If you can offer the digital pics too then I don't see where is the problem in having some good old dramatic graini pics to complement. If they will be in a book and don't need big prints then even t-max will do the job. I have some 7 x 9 1/2in with t-max 3200 @ 1600 and the grain stil very very fine.

 

I do NOT advice C-41 BW films as they look BAD when shooted at low speeds! (1/30 or 1/15 or slower... the speeds we use all the time in weddings) the pictures I toke at those speeds without flash where ugly.

 

If you dont process your films then consider just using color film and ask the minilab to get BW copies, It can be a disaster if you give your T-Max 3200 exposed @ 1600 to a lab... trust me.

Hi!. nice debut, I've never done baby work but please accept some IMHO advices.

You have to be super extra careful focusing that 50mm wide open in close distances. A nice looking portrait when at least one eye is in focus.

Careful wih the eyes flash reflections and distracting (almost black)background (nothing you can't post process).

Two of them have an underexposed look (don't know if it is your postprocessing...) a light/flash meter and manual everything is the way.

You can always cut a bit so when shooting entire body leave some space around so you will never cut a foot by distraction.

 

I gues when shooting a baby it is not easy to have always perfect everything as you have to be concentrate on the shooting instant so... as you said is challenging!

 

good luck!

I'm just looking for the same answer, I too have an Electro 35 GSN and FM3a and a fiew small rangefinders. I'd like at least auto flash 2 stops (beter 3) and bounce option, and ofcourse small and lightweight.

 

the Sunpak 1600A seems perfect but I never find it in eBay, an other is the Metz 20 C-2, I've found one in eBay and I think i'm going to buy it.

 

If you don't care about bounce the you have more options. See the Nikon SB-E, it was released to go with the FE and have special features if used with it. It's small but doesn't bounce.

 

The Nikon SB-18 is a very small TTL perfect for the FM3a if you like TTL. Doesn't bounce.

 

The Nikon SB-19 is a SB-18 but is a non TTL, it's auto with a lot of apertures (f:2 to f:11!!)

 

But if you want one single flash for all your cameras and don't care about bounce then the SB-30 is what you need, it's auto 4 stops and TTL (FM3a). It's pocketable small.

Dave, I think the defferences are VERY visible here about the red and blue thing, my eye can see that difference very well. I'm sure sure you are right about the human eye but don't tell me you cant see it by your self in that flowers

http://www.ddisoftware.com/sd14-5d/

 

You see how most zones are sharper with the 5D but the reds are a little wors than the Foveon. And that's a 5D!.

Well I can say I'm learning a lot in this forum.

 

I have played with some jpegs posted from users of Sigma SD14, Fuji S5 and Nikon 10MP in full resolution and I understand why the Foveon users are so pleased, even if it wheren't scientific testing, just downsampling and/or upsampling.

 

The thing is that I feel it rivals the D200 and S5 capablity in resolution, in fact the S5 looks quite smooth even downsamplig compared to the Foveon and Nikon in some cases.

 

I like the "true" quality of the Foveon. As a film user I find this more apealing.

 

An interesting test 5D vs SD14:

 

http://www.ddisoftware.com/sd14-5d/

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond200/page22.asp

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms3pro/page18.asp

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos400d/page19.asp

Edward - I supose the light temperature is also important for those tests. All of us can't see the same number of greys. Besides this dpreview tests doesn't mean one can have lots of information on the extremes of that latitude, BUT if one can see the difference between each grey then the latitude is there. If you take a quick look to the test hen you could say the laitude is about 5 stops but if I take the time you can see more than that.

Excuse my ignorance, how much can we enlarge a 4,7MP image before start seeng the pixels?

 

I'm guessing 2640x1760 pixels is not enough but I don't have any idea!

Thanks for the posts.

I've been looking for the dynamic range capabilities of each acording to dpreview tests:

 

10MP Canon : 8.4 EV

 

10MP Nikon : 8.0 EV

 

6,1MP Fuji : 10 EV

 

The tests are on gray scales so it doesn't mean one can have a lot of information in the extremes.

 

In real life, after looking at the samples the difference is minimal, even between the Fuji and Nikon. The Fuji captures more detail in hight lights so it alows to overexpose a litle to bring details to shadows and stil have detail in the high lights (overexpose of about 2/3 or 1 EV?). That's not bad.

 

Like others said I dont like the idea of using only Sigma lenses. I can say Sigma is out of the competition here. If the Foveon was on a D200 with a bit more of resolution than 4,7MP...

For an image quality point of view only, what's the best to do large prints and

large hight quality images. For studio, portrait and landscape work.

 

After some Googeling :

 

Nikon/Pentax/...(sony CCD) 10MP 3872x2595 More pixels

 

Canon CMOS XTi (futur 40D?)10MP 3888x2592 More pixels

 

Fuji Super CCD S5 6,1MP 3024x2016 Best dynamic range

 

Sigma Foveon SD14 4,7MP 2640x1760 Best color, pixel per pixel

performance, good range (guesing the performance will be equal or beter to the

SD10 but with more pixels)

 

In practical use the CCD and CMOS are very near in performance so a choice

between those two depends on other factors like avaiable lenses, price...

 

The Foveon gives ferfect pixel per peixel definition performance compared to

the others, but only 4,7MP, so if we downsample a CCD/CMOS image from 10 to 7

MegaPix with apropriate software I supose we can get same sharp results. The

dynamic range is beter than the CCD/CMOS.

 

The Super CCD has a bit more of pixel per pixel definition than 10MP CCD/CMOS

(just like the old nikon 6,1MP sensor had a bit more pixel per pixel definition

than the new 10MP sensor) But have to be downsampled a bit to get the same very

sharp result of the Foveon. This one has the best dynamic range, this is

critical when you can't modify the avaiable light and contrast of the subject.

It's also the best in hight ISO .

 

The 10MP CMOS/CCD have the worst dynamic range, hight ISO performance and pixel

per pixel definition but give a lot of pixels.

 

I'd like to comment this as I didn't compared for my self any of these cameras,

it's just googeling and theory. I supose the best one would be the one that

permits the bigest hight quality prints, even if it demand some time after

processing.

The Canon 5D had a price rebate and will be even cheaper this spring. That means a replacement is on it's way, why not wait until that hapends and get the futur 5D MarkII/7D for 3000USD or the super cheap (hehe) 2200USD 5D.

see this : http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/7d.htm

You can't go wrong with the mamiya RZ. I think the Mamiya is much more practical than the Hassl even if it's heavier.

 

For what I see in the school you can get A LOT more from a 6x7 neg than a prof DSLR.

It's too personal choice.

I can tell you mi own experience so you wont do the same mistakes.

 

The first MF camera I got was a Rolleiflex 6008 integral. Superb quality but has battery and it's very heavy. For studio is perfect! IMO better than hasselblad and with the choice between Zeiss lenses and Schneider lenses. Expensive.

 

Then I sell it because the lenses where too expensive and it was heavy for the photo I like, landscape.

 

then I buyed a Kowa six (Hasselblad style) with some lenses for 350?. It was old and was broken after 2 rolls. I send it to the seller and never saw it again, the seller changed address and didn't feel the need to repair it or send it to me.

 

I then buy a rolleyflex 2.8D at very low price in ebay. Superb quality but broken after the first roll!. Repair shooter and complete cleaning was not cheap so I decided to sell it. I "only" left 50? in that operation. Compared to nothing as with the kowa it's not bad.

 

I then went for a Hasselblad 500 C/M. Superb quality too but I just didn't like it, after the the rolleiflexes it had a cheap feel (this is just my opinion please don't cut my head), just as the Kowa, well not as mach as the Cowa. Besides after the rolleiflex 2.8D I liked a lot the lack of mirror and shooter vibration, no tripod needed!

 

So I finally got my Mamiya 7II wich just meet my needs: NEW, well built, no mirror, lightweight, super sharp lenses for landscape detail, no tripod (It's always better to have one but just as it was a 35mm camera, not the same need as with other MD cameras), and bigger negative. Sublime 43mm super wide angle for landscape!.

 

My advise is to avoid old cameras, they seem bargains but you depend on luck. Also buy something you are shure to use a lot, not too heavy if you plan to walk with it. I use the M7 as I use mi 35mm, I just grab it geting out of my appartament (BTW It is possible to make a good darkroom in a litle bathroom of an appartament). I can forget about close or macro photo but the fact is that I use it almost avery day, I couldn't say the same about the others I had.

 

Also the Pentax 67 (6x7 neg) is liked for landscapes. It is a SLR like a colosal 35mm look. Yes it is an SLR but have the mirror and shooter vibration litle downside (between 1sec and 1/125 some users report unsharp results) so you need an equal colosal tripod.

 

The choice is long but tell you something, large format is even worse to choose so forget about view cameras with 120 backs because then you will go around and around for months!

I think you shoud only consider it if you have a super 120 film dedicated scanner.

 

I have a M7II and scan mi negs in flat scanner and don't get close of what I get in darkroom. I Think is a waste in that case because you could have same or beter results with a good digital.

 

For what I've readed is not only mine, flat scanners give lot of pixels but the image is never really sharp.

Easy focusing, super performance, but remember... do not put the nose in the viewfinder.

 

Im sorry but i'ts true, each time I use this lens (and 43mm hotshoe adaptor) I have to clean 100 times the viewfinder because of mi breathing or nose grease.

Is it just me???

Mi vote for the Mamiya 7II with 43mm.

The lens very sharp and no distorsion.

I think the general opinion in lens sharpnes (not colour rendition)is that the fuji GX is on the top with The Mamiya RZ67 and 7 behind, Rolleiflex and Hasselblad after and behind is the P67. I remember seen a comparison chart between all those lenses systems, I did't find it now.

 

For the performance, price is very good, you'll have to pay a lot more with Hasselblad for the same result in a smaller 6x6 neg.

Also with this setup one can work w/o tripod as low as 1/30 with no vibration as with the Pentax 67II, some users repport unsharp results between 1 sec and 1/125 because of the big shuter, IMO thats a big problem as I use those speeds a lot.

With a view camera and 120 film back you may have even better results but for the little improuvemment one have to bring a tripod and take time for each pic.

I use my M7 as a 35mm camera, all other students that have big MF cameras take almost always their 35mm for outside work.

At the beginig I didn't like the rangefinder system but after 5 rolls I'm very pleased with the advantages it has. I even find that focusing is more precise that a SLR (but slower) when you get used to it.

James I think 6x7 v 6x4.5 is quite a difference. I can see the difference when I crop that much (in colours too).

 

I bouth mine in eBay from Ebay member etefore (HK Suplies) Hong Kong (is a Power seller) for less the half of price in shop here in Spain.

Hi. I don't know much about flashes, I always used mi metz TTL with my Nikon

and never asked questions, good results and easy to use.

Now I have a Mamiya 7II I'd like to start piking a little automatic flash with

aperture computer for fill flash. Most people told me about the Sunpak 383 or

the vivitar 283/285, but I'd like something more portable, for always carring.

I like the Metz 34 cs-2 but I don't want to spend a lot of money on this, the

less is better.

Are there some compact Agfatronic models that have various automatic

apertures? I ask because I see how cheap they are.

I'd like to use my rechargable Ni-MH on it, will they work in those old

flashes?

If anyone can post some brand and models so I have something to start

Googeling.

Thanks a lot.

There is the new Olympus E-400 that is extra compact/light for a DSLR and there are 2 ultra compact zooms for it too. It have smaller sensor than other DSLRs so it can be more compact. I don't know about the performances but I asume it will be better than any Compact camera.

agree about the little DOF. impossible to get with compact digicams.

But if you want to make sharp pictires with low light, there is a lot of digicams that have now added optical and/or sensor vibration reduction.

 

The new Panasonic LX2 has a wide 28mm equiv f:2,8 and manual controls plus vibration reduction.

 

BUT I've seen reviews that say the HI ISO seting have some noise.

 

In HI ISO settings, the Fujis seem to be the better ones as they have larger sensors. The new S6500fd Have 28mm f2.8, manual controls AND HiISO settings up to 3200 (don't know if it has optical or sensor vibration reduction).

1 vote for the Nikon 50mm 1,8. best buy for the money by far.

 

PS: I don't think the made in country tels anything. Mi German made Leica CM was sent to service two times. None of my other Japan made equipement had a single problem. And about the quality... it's a fact that the Zeiss is sharper lens, no care about made in Mars.