kasperhettinga

<p>My preference is (still) Rodinal for APX100....tried quite a few options, including microphen, but I keep coming back to Rodinal...</p>

<p>And about storing microphen: I store it in 500mL PET bottles for a maximum of 6 months (unused) or 3 months (after 1st use).</p>

<p>From my personal "database":</p>

<p>Delta 3200@1600 - Microphen stock - 8min / agitate 1st min & 1x/min 10sec agitation<br>

<br /> Trix 400@1600 - Microphen stock - 19min / agitate 1st min & 1x/2 min 10sec agitation</p>

<p>I'm using the sigma 30mm f/1.4 and it has become my favorite lens. It's focus action is quick&silent, IQ is good (I've heard the borders at f/1.4 are not that good, but who has anything in focus at f/1.4 in the borders anyway :)). Bokeh is nice&creamy. It has a solid feel.</p>

<p>But for astrophotography, a helicopter won't get you close enough ;)</p>

<p>I also loved my (Zuiko) 50/1.4 on film for its limited DOF, so I bought a sigma 30mm f/1.4 for my EOS 20D. Not exactly the same, but quite similar (I really like the bokeh of the sigma 30mm f/1.4).</p>

<p>You can make beautiful night shots at f/8 & ISO 100, you just need a long exposure time...which makes a tripod more useful than a fast lens.</p>

<p>I like wide angle night shots taken with my Sigma 10-20mm, the Canon-alternative (10-22mm) would be just fine as well. At f/8 & ISO 100 both will be very sharp. And your budget would then still allow a nice tripod, which will be an important tool anyway for this kind of shots.</p>

<p>I started with plastic, which works so simple that I don't feel the need to spend the money on good SS reels...</p>

<p>Why would you want this? What do you think to gain?</p>

<p>I would never like 28mm as my widest setting...try it on your 18-200 to see whether you can live with that...</p>

<p>And drinking the Grolsch beer is not too bad anyway ;)</p>

<p>The number of photos I took during the first year with my EOS 300 (back in those (film) days :P) with focus errors decreased over time without having to buy a new body....</p>

<p>Only time I kept getting focus errors were in low-light. I don't know if that is your problem?</p>

<p>My first (&current) dslr, an EOS 20D, already had less of a problem with low-light. After attaching a wide aperture prime (sigma 30mm f/1.4), I almost never have any focus problem in low-light anymore...</p>

<p>I usually have my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on my 20D. Very nice combination which I use almost exclusively.</p>

<p>I actually like to have a classic meter with my classic cameras. As my meterless cameras are all Russian or from East Germany, I bought a Sverdlovsk 4 (original Russian model). Semi-spot (8 degrees) and very accurate. 25 euros including shipping from Russia.</p>

<p>I've been using a squeegee for some time now with a similar method as Arthur: run some warm water over them just before using. Until now, I never had any problem. For me, the main reason is that I dry in a closet which is clean but not superclean. Without using a squeegee, I sometimes had dust problems, now that I use a squeegee that is totally gone...(I know that arranging a cleaner place to hang the negs to dry would be an even better solution, but I don't have that luxury what a not-all-that-big house and two small kids...)</p>

<p>I really like my plustek 7200. I'm not very happy with its colour result, but for B&W it is very nice...<br>

I use it at 3600dpi as more doesn't seem to improve the picture. I use it combined with VueScan. I've done print up to 30x45cm (11x16 inch) which came out really nice.<br>

<img src="http://foto.clanmackay.nl/backup/jun09/content/bin/images/large/12.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I like delta 3200 at EI 1600-6400 developed in stock microphen. Grain is really visible at 3200/6400, but I like it (but hey, that's me).<br>

Delta 3200@1600 in Microphen:<br>

<img src="http://foto.clanmackay.nl/backup/jul09/content/bin/images/large/0907Delta3200_18.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="526" /><br>

Delta 3200@3200 in HC-110B (can't easily find an example developed in microphen):<br>

<img src="http://foto.clanmackay.nl/backup/jun09/content/bin/images/large/17.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="524" /><br>

Delta 3200@6400 in microphen:<br>

<img src="http://foto.clanmackay.nl/backup/jul09/content/bin/images/large/Zorki6400_08.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="498" /></p>

<p>First choice for a relatively cheap lens would be the 18-55 IS as said above. An alternative if you like the lens a bit ´longer` is the 24-85mm USM. I sold my 28-135 IS after obtaining this lens - the 24-85mm is smaller, lighter, has slightly larger aperture and (at least my copy) had better IQ. AF performance is similar on these lenses: very quick with full-time manual. I use it as standard zoom on my 20D...(together with a 10-20mm for wide shots).</p>

<p>Indeed, only the 28-135 IS USM is left...I had both and sold the 28-135: The 24-85 has better IQ, is much smaller&lighter, same speedy AF, somewhat more wideangle reach...only advantage of the 28-135 is the IS, but as I used these lenses for playing kids, IS is not that useful.</p>

<p>I'm using a sigma 10-20mm and canon 24-85mm...nice combo. The 24-85 gives good quality picture (crop using only the "best part"), has very quick AF and is a tiny&light-weight lens.</p>

<p>I'm using the plustek 7200 with vista 64-bit and VueScan. This combination gives me very good quality scans.</p>

<p>I use my fast lenses at f/2-2.8 for close-up portraits, and only use it wide-open when there is more distance to the subject (e.g. shooting at night in pubs, playing kids indoors - where even at f/1.4 you may need iso 1600+).</p>

<p>I've had one for quite some time. It feels very nice, IQ is quite good up till approx. 380mm. I've written a review in Dutch here:<br>

http://zoom.nl/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22214<br>

Center crops:<br>

<img src="http://foto.clanmackay.nl/lenstest/Center_crops.jpg" alt="" width="936" height="1872" /></p>

<p>Border crops:<br>

<img src="http://foto.clanmackay.nl/lenstest/Border_crops.jpg" alt="" width="936" height="1872" /></p>

<p>Reason for sale was that I often didn't take it with me because of it's size & weight (I'm not using telelenses often anyway).</p>

<p>Why so complicated?<br>

I've done this for one film and one developer. I did similar testing on several rolls before I nailed the parameters (small changes in dev time/agitation intensity before it was perfect enough for me). Doing this for multiple films and multiple developers seems like a lot of work...</p>

<p>I like the convenience and price of a liquid concentrated developer (only exception is microphen for pushing film), I also like to see some good-looking grain and prefer relatively slow film. For this, Rodinal is hard to beat.</p>

<p>I see Rollei film on your list, can you also get Rollei retro 100? It works very well with Rodinal and I get very good scans from this combination....Today, I hope to receive a 30x45cm print from a scan of this combination :)</p>

<p>It does however depend on what you like: for minimal grain, Fuji acros (@EI 100) in Rodinal worked very well for me, much smoother negative than e.g. rollei retro.<br>

Tri-x in Rodinal on the other hand is good for a bit more (IMO good-looking) grain.</p>

<p>I didn't read the first you were talking about colour film...colour negative film developed as if it was b&w film will have a very strange base appearance indeed...</p>