toni_nikkanen

Now that the spare 35mm holders are SUPER EXPENSIVE I would like to take this opportunity to encourage 3D Printing experts to replicate those - and while at it, why not also make a model for a panorama 35mm holder that works similarly to the hacky one I made from an original?

<p>Using a Mac Mini for demanding graphics processing is simply pushing it... back in the day this kind of work had to be done on special expensive workstation-class systems, and while technology has progressed and prices have come down, we're still not at the point where you could really do this kind of work on what's basically a laptop-level computer (that's what the Mac Mini basically is, a Macbook without display and battery.)</p>

 

<p>And about memory... I wouldn't expect Silverfast to crash because you have too little RAM - your operating system would use swap to substitute for RAM in this case, which would be very very slow, but it shouldn't cause a crash. Unless there's something really odd with the software.. in the software business, anything IS possible.</p>

<p>Regarding Silverfast slow post-processing times....</p>

<p>Back in 2007, when I was using an Epson V700, I noticed that Silverfast's dust-removal processing ("iSRD") took several times longer than the ICE post-processing of the Epson Scan software. I was scanning 6x7 films at 3200 DPI so of course they were huge files but it always bothered me how Silverfast had speed issues which Epson Scan didn't. If it wasn't for the NegaFix functionality in Silverfast, I wouldn't have used it at all for this reason alone.<br>

I wonder if Silverfast still has the same problem today....</p>

 

<p>Just for the record, I tried the instructions here for getting Nikon Scan 4.0.3 working in Win8 64-bit: <a href="http://www.colorneg.com/XP/Vista/7/driver_for_64-Bit_Windows/Coolscan/Nikon_Scan/">http://www.colorneg.com/XP/Vista/7/driver_for_64-Bit_Windows/Coolscan/Nikon_Scan/</a><br>

Works fine now with my current system, it's easier to do than it looks (those instructions could be streamlined a little bit). Doable in 10 minutes for an experienced PC user - and even if not experienced, certainly a lot easier than setting up a dedicated scanning PC and keeping it running/maintained/updated/powered...</p>

<p>However since I have a Coolscan 8000, the "negative scan clipping feature" is still there, so I continue using Vuescan for most of my color neg scanning. Nikon Scan is at it's best when you have medium format film with uneven spacing, which is a hassle with Vuescan... and with positives it's fine of course. (Don't ask, this is an old and looong topic to go over from scratch once again...)</p>

 

<p>The scanner has been more or less available for a while now...<br>

However the price of used Coolscan 9000 units has not so far plummeted. What gives? Nikon die-hards still are not convinced that Opticfilm 120 delivers? <br>

I'm not looking to buy an used Coolscan 9000 for cheap, I'm just using it as a kind of indicator of the general consensus about Opticfilm 120 - after all, why pay 3000+ Euro for an used 9 year old model when you can get a new this year's model for ~1900 euro?</p>

 

<p>I'm currently using Vuescan with my Coolscan 8000 and it works perfectly fine with Windows 8 64-bit with no hassle or setting up whatsoever, with the built-in Firewire controller on my motherboard (An ASUS P7P55D-E EVO).<br>

But now I'm planning to upgrade my PC and current motherboards don't necessarily have Firewire anymore - or if they do, only in some high-end expensive models. But, cheap Firewire boards for PCI-Express are all over the place. Can anyone please confirm they have a CS8000/CS9000 working with some brand of Firewire PCI-Express board or other, on Windows 8 64-bit and with Vuescan? I'll buy the same type of board - I suppose the cheap ones are all the same anyway, but I'd like some added feeling of certainty :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Yes, Nikon RF's of course, should have mentioned them... they are, after all, nearly the same as the Contax lens mount.</p>

 

<p>For 35mm sure, there were for example the Contax II/III and their Kiev counterparts, and the Canon 7... and surely some others.</p>

<p>Well, the older Bronica system (I don't know what could be a good catch-all name for all this) which comprises of the C, D, S, S2, S2A, EC, EC-TL and EC-TL II (and maybe some more models)....</p>

<p>doesn't exactly have this, but instead it has a removable focusing helicoid. The most typical lenses between 40-200mm all use the same focusing helicoid that's in the body and thus don't have their own helicoids. However for more special lenses, you can remove the helicoid from the body and attach the lens with whatever solution it has for focusing on it's own; or attach one of the different types of bellows that are available.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Well, it appears the mechanism works great as long as I wind the camera super-slooowwwllly. I could live with that if it stays that way.</p>

 

<p>I even have the accessory finder which, by the way, is also seriously fogged. This one I think I can open up myself and attempt clean-up :)</p>

 

<p>All right, I'll have to keep an ear on the clicks - I think there is always a first click that says "the double exposure prevention mechanism has been disabled" and then a second one, which is where it should stop but it doesn't.<br>

I agree it's such a beautiful and lovely camera, I'll have to find someone who is good at servicing these... if the top plate needs to be removed they can clean up the foggy viewfinder as well.</p>

 

<p>Hello!</p>

<p>I've recently bought a really nice Eho Altix V, which worked fine for shooting 1 roll of film.<br>

Now I'm on a holiday trip shooting the second one, and of course NOW I get some problems :)<br>

Normally, the film advance should stop when I have wound the film one frame forwards. Now however every 3 frames or so, it doesn't stop - it just goes "click" and lets me wind on and on. At this point it DOES allow me to fire it though, so it's not completely dead, I'm just going to get very uneven film spacing - or that's how I suppose.</p>

<p>After I've done with the roll, what should I take a look at to see if I can make it work (without professional tools or expertise available, as I'm traveling)?</p>

<p>Also, I wonder if I have the genuine film take-up spool. It looks a bit like a typical Leica M3 spool in some ways, which figures as the film loading is similar to the Leica M3. But there is no convincing way to make the film "stick" to the spool; with luck I can make it "stick" but it leaves me with an uncertain feeling...<br>

I should just take a pic of the spool to show here, but I can't do it until I've finished the roll :)</p>

<p>As a side note, the Epson V750 has more than Silverfast when compared to the V700: It has (supposedly) better coating on the glass surfaces, and the price includes a wet-scanning solution (Which you have to request separately, which, I suppose, most people who bought the scanner don't - and wet scanning is quite a bother anyway.)<br>

Maximum sharpness at some specific spot on the frame is one thing, and getting consistently sharp scans across the whole frame is something else. One thing I've liked about the few largish medium format scans on the Plustek that I've seen is, that the grain appears pretty consistent across the whole frame. Especially for "floppy" medium like Fuji slide films, this is quite the achievement (and something I would like to repeat myself before getting too enthusiastic ;)</p>

<p> </p>

Calibration targets only apply to slide film. Each colour negative film has a different orange

mask, which the scanning software tries to remove automagically. Results vary from film to

film, app to app.

(You can try to profile this using features offered by advanced scanning applications

like silverfast and vuescan, but calibration targets have nothing to do with this.

Personally i never got this part of vuescan to work.)

<p>Vincent, can you give a rough estimate on how long it took to scan that image? Is it more like 1, 5 or 10 minutes?</p>

<p>Oh and, Mark, I guess you have provided a few scanner units to some good, well known reviewers who are just about to publish their reviews, right? I hope :)<br>

Back in the day when there was still competition in the film scanner space, the reviewers of www.photo-i.co.uk were very good. That is so long gone, most of their scanner reviews can't even be found on their website anymore.</p>

 

<p>If someone is willing to scan a frame or two of Velvia 50 6x7 that I send them, put it on a USB stick as an as-much-unprocessed .TIF as they can and send them back, I would be happy to pay them a modest fee for their trouble.</p>

 

Vincent, this is great! 6x9 velvia 50 performance is what do care about the most. Eagerly waiting for your experiences. I hope you can post at

least one image without sharpening applied.

<p>Well, apparently the scanner has started shipping in some areas as some people have been posting photos scanned with the opticfilm 120 on Flickr.</p>

<p>From those I can already see that for scanning tough Velvia 50 slides with low flare, it beats my old Coolscan 8000 hands-down - even when comparing to the condition when my scanner was still new.</p>

<p>Sharpness-wise it's hard to say. all the pics I see are reduced size and oversharpened (or something else has happened to the pictures which overblows the grain).<br>

Also no comments about real-life speed so far.<br>

Ideally I could test this device somewhere with a couple of films of my own before making up my mind. My ideal set would be to test Velvia 50, Provia 400X, Ektar and Portra 400. If the quality combination of sharpness+flare beats my CS8K, I'm buying this.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Jeff, yes, looks very familiar :) One of the main reasons I eventually moved from Pentax to Bronica. I have nothing against tripods, but every time I can get a good photo without a tripod, I would rather go without. And with the Bronica, there is nothing to complain about in that department. And the Nikkor glasses are wonderful - I've since then managed to get a Nikkor-H.C 75/2.8 for 12,50 euro, a real STEAL. (Somebody on eBay was selling it as a Nikon F mount lens, but I recognized it from the pictures :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>About the Pentax 6x7 - I had the "with Mirror-Up Device" version and that feature was overrated. At least in my use, camera shake was clearly caused by the shutter - whenever my pictures were shaken, they were shaken in a purely horizontal direction - the "flagpoles get doubled" effect. The poor mirror was blamed for crimes it didn't commit.<br>

Some people see it in a completely opposite way, which leads me to think - could my shutter have been out of tune and moving too forcefully? Or then everyone else on the Internet is just wrong ;)</p>

<p>The Bronica new screen isn't really such a big deal - the Kiev-88 screen (I mistakenly said Kiev-60 before) is a very near fit - please see for example http://www.photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/0013D0?start=10 <br>

If it's without adjustments spot on at close range and very slightly off at infinity, it's good enough for me. I can focus to infinity without looking at the screen anyway :)</p>

 

<p>I wouldn't be so sure. Considering how much noise the camera makes when firing, it doesn't actually shake so much. Thanks to the innovative splitting mirror and the fact that the shutter travels vertically, sharp pictures are indeed possible hand-held.</p>

<p>I used to have a Pentax 6x7 and THAT camera did cause some real shake hand-held.</p>

 

<p>I agree, that standard Nikkor-P 75mm lens is what got me hooked on Bronicas in the first place. It's deadly sharp even shot fully open.</p>