audidudi

Although I don't do much street photography, when I do, I use my Minolta Autocord LMX and attach it to a modified Minolta Power Grip One with a Minolta 320PX flash unit. It's actually quite comfortable to carry, is quick to focus and shoot, and has a built-in meter.

 

Unfortunately, the meter is only accurate during the middle of the day so I often carry a handheld meter with me and rely upon that instead. If this is a problem for you, though, you can always save a few bucks and buy an unmetered Autocord, then use your savings to buy a Cosina "button" meter and mount it in the cold shoe ... a friend uses one of these with his Leica M3 and swears by it.

In response to Bill Mitchell's comments above, check out the modified Graphic View at the www.bigcamera.com site. These cameras can be had for as little as $100 on a good day and if you're even a little handy in the shop, modifying it to work with wide-angle lenses might be the most cost-effective option available.

The long outdated Microtek 35t+ is a 35mm film scanner but it has a ~38mm square scanning area. Back when I was less well off, I successfully used one to scan "superslides" that were cut out of my 6x6 originals because I couldn't afford a medium-format scanner. While it has limited resolution compared to today's best scanners, I made many very nice 8" square prints with it. With a bit of luck, you should be find a used one for less than $150 and maybe even less than $100 ... heck, if I still have mine around, I'll sell it to you for that!

 

Another alternative is the Minolta Scan-Multi ... this scans medium-format film at 1128ppi but in my experience, it does a better job than most flatbed scanners. It uses the same glass carrier for all formats up to 6x9, which means your film won't fall through the opening as it will with most other scanners, and there's a separate black plastic mask for each one. If you have the ability to custom-cut a mask for your 4x4, then you'll have no problem scanning your images (after they've been removed from their mounts, unfortunately) with this scanner. These are also selling for very little these days and with a bit of luck, you should be able to find a used one for $250 or possibly less. (New, factory-refurbished ones can also be purchased for ~$500, if you're leery of buying a used one.)

 

The only downside to either of these scanners is they're both SCSI devices and you will need to buy a SCSI card if your computer doesn't have one (or isn't a Mac). One positive aspect for either of these scanners is that they're both supported by Vuescan, which (IMO) is a much better and more competent software package than either scanner's factory provided software.

Well, it's a good thing I bought mine when I did as it appears the demand for these scanners has driven the eBay prices back up from $600 to $1000, with a buy-it-now price of $1150. While not nearly as great a deal as it was a week ago at $600, it's still a pretty good deal given the scanner's performance...

I know nothing about the Komura 50mm lens but if you get lucky, you might be able to find a Mamiya Press/Universal 50mm/f6.3 without a finder for a decent price and it will cover 6x9 with a small amount of movement available. Unfortunately, you'll need to remount the lens elements in another Copal 0 shutter but these can salvaged from Polaroid/Tominon copy camera lenses quite inexpensively.

Straight from Toyo's site: "180-820 (8705) 4x5 Reversable Back. Non-revolving back weights 8 ounces less than revolving back"

 

That said, even a six-ounce weight savings is worthwhile when it cost only $8.60 for postage and insurance. :^)

By the way, according to the high-zoot digital postal scale here at work, the revolving back (without ground-glass and carrier) weighs 12.5 ounces and the convertible back (also without the ground-glass and carrier) weighs 6.5 ounces. By my calculations, the weight difference between them is only six ounces and not the eight ounces that Toyo claims. (Also, part of the weight savings is due to the absence of the revolving back's bail mechanism, which is something I didn't realize until I actually had the convertible back in my hands. Not a big deal for me, fortunately, but possibly a big deal for someone else...)

Joerg, I know nothing about Silverfast -- well, actually, I tried it a few years ago and found it more complicated than I wanted to learn and more expensive than I was willing to pay -- but one advantage Vuescan has over other software, particularly Silverfast, is that one version fits all. In other words, so long as your new scanner is supported, then it will work with the Vuescan software you've already installed. In my case, this means that I have been able to use the same software with my Microtek 35t+, Minolta Scan-Multi, and Polaroid Sprintscan 45i.

 

As for the learning curve with Vuescan, as with most programs, it does take some time to master. However, having taken the time to "master" it four years ago, I've had the luxury of only having to learn how to use the occasional new features instead of starting from scratch with each new scanner. Combined with the price -- I bought it when it was being offered with free lifetime upgrades -- it's hard to beat if you put the quality of the scans above ease of use.

Just a note to let everyone know that James and I were able to work out a deal to our mutual satisfaction as well as to remind everyone of what an incredible resource this community has become, despite the unfortunate change of venue. My girlfriend swore that I'd regret my decision to mail off a piece of my camera to someone I'd never met and trust him to make good on his promise to send me a piece of his in return, but I'm happy to report that she was wrong (this time, anyway!)

Sorry, David, but there was no SCSI driver ever written for the Windows version, just GPIB. While the Mac versions could output 16-bit files, the Windows version a friend owned several years ago would output only 8-bit files. :^(

Yes, Bill, it comes with film holders: 35mm, 6x6, 6x7 and 4x5. As I understand it, the optional glass-carrier comes with masks that allow you to scan a few other formats as well, although I don't know which ones. If you need to scan 6x9, it wouldn't be too difficult to modify either the 6x6 or 6x7 holder accordingly but the modifications would be permanent (you'll need to enlarge the opening) and will prevent you from using the modified holder to scan the original format. I don't know whether Polaroid will sell you just one of the film holders these days but I do know that when a friend tried to buy one a few years ago, Polaroid would only sell him a complete set of holders for something like $200.

 

And David, you're right about SCSI devices selling for pennies-on-the-dollar these days. Insofar as Leaf scanners are concerned, though, I believe that for Windows users, the Leafscan 45 uses a GPIB connection and only delivers 8-bit files, both of which are pretty serious limitations. Not to mention the fact that they're incredibly slow (Still, if you're scanning only B&W negs, they have some useful features not found on so-called "modern" scanners).

 

One other nice thing about the Sprintscan 45 series scanners is that they're all supported by Vuescan, which means I haven't had to learn how to use any new software in the past three years, despite changing scanner brands/models three times. Since knowing how to optimally tweak the software is, IMO, responsible for at least half the quality of the final scan, this is another big plus in the Sprintscan 45 Ultra's favor. :^)

Specs aren't everything, Richard, and especially not the specs claimed by scanner manufacturers. Although perhaps not as optimistic as the specs claimed by manufacturers of car stereo amplifiers back in the '80s, they're not very far behind...

 

As for comparing the performance of the Sprintscan 45 Ultra with that of the Epson 3200, I'm afraid I can't help you there because I have no experience with the newest Epson. However, I can say that when I compared 6x6 scans from the Epson 2450 to those from my Minolta Scan-Multi (using Vuescan software), there was no comparison ... except for file size, the Minolta scans were superior in every respect.

 

Regarding the Sprintscan's low profile, I suspect a lot of that has to do with its price -- as I pointed out, the original list was $7495 -- and Polaroid's failure to achieve a significant presence in the high-end CCD film scanner marketplace rather than the actual performance of the scanners. That said, the original unit -- Sprintscan 45 -- _was_ pretty much a dog and while its replacement -- Sprintscan 45i -- was much better in many respects, it still had more noise in the shadow areas than most of its competitors and (IMO) lacked the last little bit of resolution. Although I have only minimal experience with the latest and final version -- Sprintscan 45 Ultra -- it appears to perform significantly better than the 45i that I'm replacing. However, it's still too much too early for me to offer any definitive opinions about its performance.

 

If you shoot 4x5, your scanner budget reaches only to $600 (or $700, as per Bill's comments above), you don't want to buy a used scanner, and you're not scared away by the Sprintscan 45 Ultra's discontinued status, then you might wish to consider it along with the handful of other scanners in this price range. However, if some or all of the above caveats aren't true for you, then perhaps you'd do better to buy some other scanner instead...

In the past week, 8 new-in-the-box Sprintscan 45Us have been sold on eBay by various sellers: 1 @ $699.95; 1 @ $690.00; 1 @ $650.00; 3 @ $639.95, and 2 @ $600.00. The one that Bill refers is offered by the same outfit I bought mine (for $600.00) and if my experience dealing with them holds true, they might be willing to end the auction early and sell it for $650.00 instead of their buy-it-now-price of $700 ... at least that's what happened in my case (and it was they who approached me, not vice-versa).

The following is a public service announcement for anyone wishing to

scan 4x5s at home without spending a lot of money...

 

Polaroid has discontinued their line of scanners and as a result, you

can buy a new-in-the-box Sprintscan 45 Ultra, which is a multi-format

film scanner capable of scanning 4x5 at 2571ppi as well as MF and

35mm, on eBay and elsewhere for as little as $600 plus shipping. This

is a fraction of its original list price ($7495), ~30% of what they

were selling for a year ago, and ~50% of what they were selling for

just a few months ago.

 

Expensive though it once was, this scanner is not perfect, but it's

been my

experience that with careful setup, it'll outperform any other scanner

in this price range. If you're considering buying an Epson 3200 or

some such in the near future, then you might want to check out this

scanner before they're all gone...

This appears to be the Mircrotek version of the Polaroid Sprintscan 45 Ultra ... the specs are identical and since Microtek is the OEM behind the Polaroid line of scanners, it seems reasonable to assume the two scanners are indeed related.

 

That said, you can buy new-in-the-box Sprintscan 45 Ultras for as little as $600 plus shipping on eBay these days. Polaroid has discontinued selling them but is providing a one-year warranty and I think it's safe to assume they'll be able to provide service for a fee for a while longer still. (And even if they can't or won't, at $600, you can almost afford to throw it away after a year!)

 

I just bought one on eBay to replace my Sprintscan 45i, the 2000ppi predecessor to the Sprintscan 45 Ultra, and I'm hopeful that it will address my complaints with the 45i (specifically, noisy shadows and a bit less sharpness with MF images than I can achieve with my Minolta Scan-Multi). For the money, though, there's really no better option if you're planning to scan 4x5s and since that's exactly what I'm planning to do with it (and more importantly, I'm busy wracking up $2k overtime checks every other week, so at the moment, I can afford to divert $641 from my otherwise tight budget), I decided to take my chances on buying one scan-unseen.

 

Compared to your HP, either scanner will almost certainly capture noticeably better scans and if flatness proves to be an issue -- the Polaroid version, at least, uses magnets to hold the film in place, which sometimes allow it to droop a bit in the middle -- Polaroid has an optional glass-carrier assembly you can buy for ~$250. Having not had any problems using a glass-carrier with my Scan-Multi, I'll probably buy one of these, too, just in case...

According to the Toyo website, their fancy-schmancy 360-degree

revolving back weighs a whopping 8 ounces more than their humble

vertical/horizontal reversible one.

 

Since I'm on a quest to make my Toyo 45G "field" camera (4x5 rear

standard, 2x3 front standard) as light as possible and don't need the

revolving feature thanks to my re-engineered mounting rail setup, I'm

willing to trade my revolving back even-up for a reversible back in

similar condition.

 

If any Toyo Field camera owners are interested in trading (or someone

has a reversible back they're willing to sell inexpensively), please

drop me a line.

I second Jim Galli's comments about the 75mm/f5.6 Mamiya/Polaroid lenses ... for 6x9, they offer plenty of movements and for what they sell for these days -- last year, I saw one sell for less than $100 on eBay -- they're a bargain compared to the performance they offer. If you don't want to remount the lens elements in another shutter, you can remove the lens/shutter assembly from the OEM focusing mount and mount it on a lensboard without too much difficulty.

Can't help with anything but value: Yesterday, one sold on eBay for the "buy it now" price of $529.95.

I own a Minolta Scan-Multi (and use with it Vuescan, instead of the "II" version software) and preferred its scans to those of an Epson 2450. If the 3200 is significantly better than the 2450, then those results might change; if not, then it might be a close call.

Yes, Imacon parts can be quite costly, too. A friend recently purchased an older one that needed some refurbishing and as I recall, just a power cord (with a built-in power supply, naturally) was over $300 and the new bulbs were something like $60 each. I can only imagine how proud they must be of the circuit boards and serious mechanical parts!

While used drum scanners can be purchased quite inexpensively, I have heard enough stories about uneconomical repairs to scare me away from buying one. Remember, when it comes to repairs, these are still $30k+ scanners, not $3k scanners...

When I did this, I not only measured the thickness of the shutters with a dial caliper but also the overall depth of the lens elements installed in the shutters using a dial-indicator on a stand. As I recall, the difference between the two was .003", which was close enough for me not to worry about it.

 

As for the 75mm lens, if you don't mind permanently trashing the focusing helical (I didn't), then it's a fairly easy matter to cut it up so that you can use the factory shutter and retain the factory cable release linkage. If you need more details, let me know.

 

BTW, if you can live with covering 6x6 and just a few mm of movement or covering 6x7 straight on, and you don't mind the corners going slightly soft, then you might want to try the 55mm/f4.5 Mamiya TLR lens. To my eye, it performs slightly better than the 50mm/f6.3 Mamiya Press lens; in fact, comparing my two samples, I find my 55mm lens (purple coating, 98XXX serial number range) to be sharper in the center, with better color, and slightly more contrast. It's quite a bit less expensive, too!

www.uline.com ... they have them in 2mil, 4mil and 6mil thicknesses and with both regular ziplocks as well as the slider-type.

<P>This <a href=http://members.cox.net/gmhsint/UniversalPressAndPolaroid.htm>link</a> should yield some useful info for you.</P>

<P>Here's a <a href=http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003bKy>write-up of the procedure</a> that I used to mount my Mamiya/Polaroid lenses on a lensboard for view camera use.</P>