nick_bumgardner

I would love to get one of these when they are actually in stock. It looks like a great piece of gear.

<p>I was wondering about getting a scanner for LF myself. I shoot 4x5 and was wondering what a good scanner is? Also I was wondering how good is the quality on like the V700 or the V750? What size print can I produce with scanning with one of these? Would I be better off just getting scans done at the lab?</p>

Lobalobo- I have thought about going the LF way from time to time and think that for

some of my subjects that LF is more than fitting. I have yet to invest in LF though becasue

of the time it takes to get images processed and the entire length of setting up a shot. I

do think that a flatbed scan of a LF negative can look amazing.

 

Scott- You have asked a bunch of good questions. I am a commercial photographer that

still has to do photojournalism(i do love it) because I don't have enough clients yet to do

commercial full time. I shoot for a wide variety of clients and they have drastically

different demands out of me and my images. One day I might be shooting a CD cover and

the next I might be shooting stills on a video set, or doing product shots, and the next

shooting for a car magazine. I have very very little scanning experience. I have only post-

processed film scans a few times when I had some alternative process stuff that I did for a

client. The time factor is something that is important because I stay pretty busy but if the

image quality is going to be their I am ok with a larger time commitment. I think that you

are probably right that keeping my all digital workflow could be best.

 

The only reason I thought about doing this is because their is another guy that wants to go

in on a scanner and I told him I would think about it. When I compare printed images

from my Canon to my Mamiya I like the tonality and detail of the Mamiya much more than

the Canon. I think that compared to my 35mm film cameras that my 1D is juat as good

and better at high ISO images. The scanner would fill the gap where optimal image quality

and detail were wanted...

Recently I have been thinking about purchasing a film scanner. The question I have is how will the quality

of a scanned 645 negative compare to that of my Canon 1DMKIII? The scanners that I am thinking about

are the Epson V750, Nikon 8000, or Nikon 9000. I do a lot of photojournalism work, some adverting

work, and some magazine work. The scanner will not be used for any photojournalism because I don't

have enough time to develop and scan. I would be using it mainly for advertising and artist promo shoot

type stuff in addition to just messing around with it.

 

So how does the quality of a scanned negative compare to that of a digital capture? I have looked for an

answer but I seem to have just found people not wanting to comment on the issue.

I have a 2.0 that I use on my EOS-1D Mark III from time to time. I have played with the Version 3 but could not justify the price. I got the 2.0 for $100 with tax so I couldn't pass it up.

I think your set up is just fine. While many like the 28-70 or 24-70 I have never been a fan of that zoom range thats just me. My Nikon kit looked a like what you want.

Andrew,

 

It really depends on what you want in a bag as to what will be best for you. Some people like bags that have a lot of padding while some people like bigs with out much padding.

 

I shoot out of two different bags. I have a Domke F6 for my medium format bag and a Domke Little Bit Bigger bag that I have my canon kit in it fits 3 bodies, and depending on what lenses I pack up to 9 lenses. I like the Domke because its easy to get at my lenses and is pretty light and has alot of pockets and its water repellent.

Ed hit the nail on the head and described exactly why I switched from Nikon to Canon. I can go down to the paper before a shoot and borrow whatever Canon glass I need. I don't have the money to be able to have that kind of variety of Nikon glass.

Great pics bro.

The D80 is a 1.5x crop factor camera. So multiply 28x1.5=42 so you have the effective fov of a 42mm lens.

 

Nick

Actually the loony eleven rule is the way to go. At f11 use the reciprocal of the ISO for shutter speed if the moon is full.

 

I was given this chart or something like it

 

Full Moon 1/250th sec at f/11 at ISO 250

Gibbous Moon 1/125th sec at f/11 at ISO 250

Quarter Moon 1/60th sec at f/11 at ISO 250

Wide Crescent 1/30th sec at f/11 at ISO 250

Thin Crescent 1/15th sec at f/11 at ISO 250

Earthshine 2 sec at f/2.8 at ISO 250

 

As Matt was saying the best thing to do is a multiple exposure shot.

I too have several systems. I am a pj and for work I usually shoot my Canon 1DMKIII because of its 10fps and work allows me to borrow long fast lenses. My Nikon D70 tags along on assignment with me as a backup and for its better flash capabilities. The Nikon CLS is amazing. I also shoot a Mamiya M645 for portrait work and for landscapes. I also have a Olympus rangefinder for street photography. I could just use my Canon 1D for everything but their are times when I dont want to lug it around.

Sounds like photography to me. You can do everything you did to that image in photoshop with black and white printing. When I print black and white photos in the lab I can crop them, add filters, fix convergence and do quite a lot of other things.

 

A photographer or a photograph are not defined just by their equipment.

You can get a soft focus filter. I think that the soft focus filters are a bit hokey but thats me. I have also heard of people doing the Vaseline thing.

I thank that a Canon G9 fits the bill perfectly. It comes in at about $450. It is 12mp, 6x optical zoom, and a 3in lcd screen. It is also smaller and lighter than the G3.

Rose,

 

I say take your camera and have fun. After all this is Thanksgiving. You are going to be celebrating with your friends and your family and they will love the photos no matter what. I have found that people are flattered when you take pictures of them even when the photo is not great. The more photos that you take the better you are going to get. My advise is put that 50mm lens on the camera and take lots of pictures. I take pictures for a living and the majority of my photos are not usable but you get those few that are and that should make your day. To give you an example if I take 1500 photos at a football game their is only going to be one or two of those that make the paper the next day, but its those one or two photos that count. If you are not their with you camera and ready you wont get the pictures.

Are you filling the cards all the way up till you have 0 shots remaining? I have found that when you have 0 shots remaining you are much more likely to get the message you speak of.

 

Nick

Ali,

 

Just keep at it. The more you shoot the better you will get. I remember in college some of my class mates had horror stories for the first semester of developing their own film. I think all of us have had days like you are experiencing. I don't know if the roll you just took will develop correctly but for next time take it to the darkroom if you have a similar experience. My advice is go out and take another roll of pics and get back into the dark room.

Ralph I think that Huw has asked a legitimate question and deserves a legitimate answer and not a snide comment.

 

Huw different photographers have different needs and thus different styles of cameras exist.

 

SLR cameras have many advantages over point and shoot cameras for some types of photography. If you want a small compact camera for family get togeathers or snap shots a point and shoot might serve you better than a slr. On the other hand if you shoot for sports illustrated you might need a camera that shoots 10 frames per second is weather proofed and offers you the ability to change lenses and high enough quality to do a two pages spread.

 

So what I am trying to say is you are missing something. To be of more help I need to know more about your situation and what cameras you are looking at.

 

Nick

I have heard from some other journalist that the blue dots are working. I myself have yet to be given the opportunity to send my camera in. In the Canon forums over at fredmeranda.com their have been alot of talks about he blue dot version. I have one of the pre-fix cameras and despite the problems with af love the camera.

I agree with Walt this is a pointless comparison. You admit in the first sentence that the pictures were taken by different photographers at different locations. The images could have been processed differently or incorrectly exposed to begin with. Also the lighting is different in the pictures. To come up with an objective test you have to be in a controlled environment.

 

The real truth though is that the best camera is the one that you use. I have many cameras ranging in all different formats and use them all and never think about which one is sharpest or has the most mp. The biggest concern is which camera is going to be best for my situation.

 

Have fun bro

Adam,

 

I have the Mamiya 645 1000s and it is an amazing camera. For 345bucks I got the body a metered prism finder and an 80mm f2.8 lens and a back. For the money it is the best camera I have ever bought.

Andrea,

 

Alvin is right for the most part and guides you to an excellent article. In addition most af points are more sensitive to vertical lines than horizontal. The center point is also more sensitive than the outlying points. A faster lens will also allow for faster focusing because it allows more light into the camera.

Good looking pics especially the second one. On the first one your white balance is off a quick adjustment in Lightroom will fix that. Keep on taking pictures.

I use a laptop for my image editing. I constantly am importing pictures into lightroom or photoshop and editing with out many problems. Sometimes it gets real slow but i you have everything else closed it chugs along just fine.