alwin_meyer2

<p>@ Dan,<br>

Thanks for the advice and clear explanation of the capabilities of digital formats relative to film. I was an easy spender on analogue equipment and own a collection of Leica, Hasselblad, Rolleiflex, Hexar and whatever equipment. I started maybe 2 years ago to look at digital. I bought and sold several M43 and Nex camera's but I am rather greedy regarding digital body's because I still view them as very short term investments. Hence my choice for a 5D as a possibility to test the waters of digital FF.<br>

I bought new a Nex C3 and an Olympus Epm1 with EVF and several lenses for both. I miss though a certain quality that Philip described above as a 'sense of space'. I apologized in my original post for my unscientific description of this phenomenon. Yet photographers who shot with film 35mm and MF would often have this different feel regarding prints of both formats. Most probably this difference can objectively be expressed in numbers related to magnification lines per mm and so forth. <br>

So I felt it would be easier to address those with decades of film experience and ask "hey, would the print quality improvement between Nex and a 5D be like getting more of the nice spacious feeling that an MF print would give compared with a 35mm print". I fear that my question was poorly worded though, as I am not looking for magic in camera's or lenses. It is all physics after all, but with a very big amount of variables to master though.<br>

I am consevatively bidding on some 5D's on my local craig's list and we will see what happens.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I realized that thanks. Kindly delete this post</p>

<p>@ Marcus</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It is NOT the same feel as MF, but it is far <em>closer to that feel than the NEX. </em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks, your answer is exactly what I was curious about. If I could compare Nex (16 MP sensor) with Canon 5D would I experience a noticeable improvement, comparable with the improvement between film 35mm and film 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 (6x6). i AM NOT LOOKING FOR THE SAME QUALITY AS MF FILM IN DIGITAL BUT CURIOUS IF THE JUMP FROM NEX TO 5D WOULD GIVE ME A COMPARABLE IMPROVEMENT.Your answer is interestingly a qualified yes.<br>

and @ Philip</p>

<blockquote>

<p>That said I think you might like the 5D but for its own capabilities and qualities. I find the images are much better than those of higher megapixel smaller sensor bodies like M43.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks, although Nex seems a step up from M43 what you say may mean that the 5D would give better images than Nex, especially in the subjective " MF feel" factor realm. </p>

<p>Apologies; herewith the link I mentioned in the above post.</p>

<p>

<p>Thanks Don, Colin, Marcus, David and Richard for the excellent and well informed help.<br>

In spite of the unclear wording of my query, you all managed to come up with useful posts. My question should have been:<br>

I experienced a clear difference in viewing quality between prints (or even screen) made from 35 mm and medium format film. Would I experience a (comparable) quality difference between Nex and 5D mark I? <br>

I do not really care about the user experience of any system. I am purely after the final achievable quality in print (or screen).<br>

For illustration purposes; my photo in the link below was made with a Hasselblad and then scanned. To me it still has a medium format feeling, I could not get with 35mm. <br>

Thanks again for all your help. </p>

 

<p>I posted this message in the mirrorless forum first but I realize that there may be more relevant experience here. I will delete if that is preferable.<br>

Would the Canon 5D mark 1 give me the medium format feeling I described below ?<br>

I moved to digital a year ago from Leica and Rolleiflex / Hasselblad. I loved the look of medium format prints so much that I began the use the Rolleiflex as my main camera for street and just about everything.<br /> As if film medium format could capture the scene with ease and a lot of air to breathe while the same scene in 35mm feels more cramped and suffocating. I am a numbers person and I apologize for the rather unscientific , but to me relevant, explanation. I am sure, though, that people who used film medium format and 35mm know what I mean.<br>

I like M43 (epl1, epm1 + EVF + pana 20mm) because of the portability with its small and decent primes and I like Nex (C3+sigma 30mm) because of the bigger negative and getting nice shots with legacy lenses.<br>

I would be interested to hear from people who experienced my dilemma.<br /> I read every thread on the web about 5D vs aps-c but did not find the answer. Some find the 5D still relevant and capable while others see it at as too long in the tooth and surpassed by my most current and previous generation aps-c camera's. None of this answers my question though about the medium format feeling.<br>

<br />I would not be willing to invest much more than a 5D mark i. A half decent 5D would cost around 500 euro's in my region. I have a lot of Nikon FF primes from my film days that I could use on a 5D.<br /> If the 5D would work I would put the Nex stuff for sale and if the 5D would not be my camera I would invest in a Nex 6 or 7 in due course or wait for prices of more capable FF's to come down more.</p>

 

<p>Would the Canon 5D mark 1 give me the medium format feeling I described below ?</p>

<p>I moved to digital a year ago from Leica and Rolleiflex / Hasselblad. I loved the look of medium format prints so much that I began the use the Rolleiflex as my main camera for street and just about everything.<br>

As if film medium format could capture the scene with ease and a lot of air to breathe while the same scene in 35mm feels more cramped and suffocating. I am a numbers person and I apologize for the rather unscientific , but to me relevant, explanation. I am sure, though, that people who used film medium format and 35mm know what I mean.</p>

<p>I like M43 (epl1, epm1 + EVF + pana 20mm) because of the portability with its small and decent primes and I like Nex (C3+sigma 30mm) because of the bigger negative and getting nice shots with legacy lenses.</p>

<p>I would be interested to hear from people who experienced my dilemma.<br>

I read every thread on the web about 5D vs aps-c but did not find the answer. Some find the 5D still relevant and capable while others see it at as too long in the tooth and surpassed by my most current and previous generation aps-c camera's. None of this answers my question though about the medium format feeling.</p>

<p><br />I would not be willing to invest much more than a 5D mark i. A half decent 5D would cost around 500 euro's in my region. I have a lot of Nikon FF primes from my film days that I could use on a 5D.<br>

If the 5D would work I would put the Nex stuff for sale and if the 5D would not be my camera I would invest in a Nex 6 or 7 in due course or wait for prices of more capable FF's to come down more.</p>

 

<p>Try one first, you may hate the way it functions; For the moment it is not more than a name to you. Furthermore look on the web for details about the systen; You could start here<br>

http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Hasselblad500.html~mainFrame<br>

If you are sure you want medium format (are you???) try rolleiflex twin lenses or rangefinders because they seem more suitable for street / travel. I used a 500CM for street but I don't think it is the easiest camera for that. A Hassy + standard lens + one back is 1600 grams. Add another lens and back and you are heading towards 3 kilo's.</p>

<p>The summicron type I is considered by many one of the greatest B&W lenses. The summaron, however, comes close to it or surpasses the summicron at some apertures.<br>

see link: http://www.antiquecameras.net/35summicronmlenses.html<br>

I think these lenses are about the best built quality ever ( I have both and other Leica and VC lenses). The summaron is an opportunity the get the best B&W quality (if you like that look) for a reasonable price, since the summicron I, especially Wetzlar made, is rather steeply priced and not necessarily better.<br>

If you can get a good one, you bought yourself a keeper for life.</p>

 

<p>Thanks again to all for an interesting discussion.</p>

<p>I spoke with the nice photoshop person in my city, who also writes for magazines and is very knowledgeable in my view. He checked around a bit and did not hear anything about Fuji B&W films being discontinued, nor did any of you.</p>

<p>So for the moment I consider it a rumour and unpleasant marketing from the other shop who told me about the discontinuation.</p>

<p>As some indicated, this discussion is another lesson not to believe everything a photoshop / the internet tells you.</p>

<p>I used to be irritated sometimes by the endless discussions about lines per mm in the Lieca forums and I would think "go and take pictures with any camera and you will improve your photography more than by talking about lines per mm".</p>

<p>Having sais that, I believe there are different hobbies in the field of photography although we don't (like to) define them as such.</p>

<p>There are photo technical hobbyists. It is their right to take pictures to determine lines per mm, etc.</p>

<p>The other group is probably the people who want the best they can afford and are always on the look out for something "better". They became collectors of quality equipment rather than photographers, also legitimate.</p>

<p>Now I think that photographers, when they want to invest in equipment, can maybe learn from the quality equipment collectors and the photo technical hobbyists. The problem comes when photographers want to know about practical applications and enter into a discussion with the other hobbyists.</p>

<p>The views invariable diverge. Photographers care about what equipment can do for them in their given situation and then give the "go out and take pictures in stead of talking about it" answer. While on the other hand for the quality equipment collectors and the photo technical hobbyists counting lines per mm is the essence of their hobby.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Yes, light leaks,</p>

<p>but the linear patterns on the right and bottom don't seem shutter nor scanning related to me.</p>

<p>What film do you use how old is it? Is the pattern on the backing paper the same as the stripes in your pic?</p>

<p>If your shutter has a vertical slit the horizontal stripes indicated by the arrows can not be caused by the shutter, but are leaks or scanning related. I have a 500CM and don't know how your shutter is positioned.</p>

<p>I f you want to enjoy medium format on the cheap buy a Yashica Mat or something. That will allow you take pictures in stead of worrying what is the next thing going wrong with your Kiev, which is a notoriously unreliable camera. All the money you will need to fix the problems in the Kiev will buy you a Yashica mat. Besides any investment you do in the Kiev will still leave you with the same unreliable and not so well engineered camera and only increase your losses. </p>

<p>Not to mention the frustration of returning from a holiday or event only to find out that all your irreplacable shots are ruined.</p>

<p>@ Kevin,<br>

Robert is a great source for me, especially since I live in Holland.</p>

<p>@ Gumanow<br>

Your story makes me wonder though, because my question began because I asked the shop exactly like you about neopan 400 in 120. Then I got the reply, "Don't think we will get it anymore and it wouldn't surprise me if acros will be discontinued as well".</p>

<p>Woow, that is more response than I ever expected; Clearly us film shooters are still alive and kicking albeit with an undertone of concern at times. Thanks to all. I feel more reassured.</p>

<p>I will check tomorrow with the nicer shop in town where the responsible person (seasoned pro photog) is both very knowledgeable and kind (and an Acros user). He would know any gossip in the world of film. I will keep you informed.</p>

<p>Thanks alot for your answers. It appears thus to be, hopefully, an isolated rumour from one reluctant store.</p>

<p>Just for completeness sake the closing factory was according to the guy producing paper. He mentioned it in his story about the films but he only implied that it had to do with the films.</p>

<p>@ Kevin,<br>

Fuji b&w films are generally appreciated by the pro/advanced amateur crowd but are considered difficult by some in this country. A film that easily gives very good results with Rodinal is by all means an easy film in my book ;-)</p>

<p>I just settled on Acros and Neopan 400 as additions to my favourite films after trying a few developers and exposure indexes (was an Ilford user mostly).</p>

<p>Now the "pro" supplier in The Hague, The Netherlands where I live is telling me that he does not expect to have Neopan 400 ever again and that he has a strong suspicion that Acros will disappear from the market as well. Allegedly partly based on the rumour of the closure of a production facility in Europe.</p>

<p>Is there a truth to this rumour or does he simply not feel like stocking Fuji alongside Kodak and Ilford for the relatively small demand?</p>

<p>Thanks for your answers, 'cause the guy got me worried,</p>

<p> </p>

<p>David,</p>

<p>Hope you will enjoy your 21 even more after you manage to get the finder right.</p>

<p>I am so relieved that I was able to fix it because I was really upset to find the finder misaligned and cursed myself for not having been more careful when buying 2nd hand. But now I feel really satisfied that everything is working after 5 minutes of attention.</p>

<p>Just a tip.</p>

<p>In order to prevent the element with the finder lines to move when you put the two finder halves back together, stick the element from the outside with a bit of sticky tape to the finder half you adjusted it in.</p>

<p>I had this problem and had to retry a couple of times until I used the tape. Of course get tape that does not damage the finder element.</p>

<p>Soon Chung,<br>

The job is done. You reassured me saying that each element sits in its own slot. I once messed up some Soviet finder years ago and did not want to repeat that. <br>

I bought new jeweller's screw drivers and I took out the screws easily with a cross head size 0. The two parts of the finder seemed lightly glued in place probably because the rear element (with the dreaded finder lines) and other elements had some rubber cement. I pried it open by lightly pulling the two halves from the front and rear alternately with my fingers.<br>

All in all it took less than 5 minutes.</p>

<p>Alex,<br>

Two screws is two screws less to screw up than four screws ;-)</p>

<p>Thanks again to all</p>

 

<p>Thanks Antonio and Alex,<br>

 

 

It seems I have the newer finder that came with the 21 LTM. It has 2 screws on the bottom of the finder. A picture is attached.</p>

 

 

<p>I briefly tried to open it, but it was firmly screwed and I feared my jeweller's screw driver was not exactly the right size and I would ruin the screw heads.I will get a new set of screw drivers and try some more.</p>

 

<p>Any other advice of course is more than welcome.</p><div></div>

<p>I recently acquired a VC 21/4.0 LTM, the one with the finder included, for my M cameras. I am very pleased with the lens, but the viewfinder frame lines are not properly aligned horizontally.</p>

<p>When composing with the viewfinder your photos end up leaning in one direction. It was 2nd hand and brand new looking and it was my fault that I did not test the finder. So no returns.</p>

<p>Before getting my screwdriver; Does any body know whether it is possible to open the finder and slightly rotate the first element with the frame lines (closest to the eye) in order to position the frame lines correctly or is there any other solution?</p>

<p>Thanks a lot for your help!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>It is written on the lens where it is made (Wetzlar / Canada), so there is a clear differentiation anyway. So mistifying lens numbers are not going to confuse the lens' origins. I have a Wetzlar one and it is my benchmark B&W lens.</p>

<p>see here some info: http://www.antiquecameras.net/35summicronmlenses.html</p>

<p>Just to add to the confusion, could it be that crafty sellers put a Wetzlar marked ring on the lens to fetch better prices. I read once how the first bajonet lenses (where a bajonet was mounted on the LTM) were sometimes offered as rare LTM 35-2 8 elements. So one has te be careful.</p>

<p>Davide, I experienced that certain films load like a dream on SS reels and others don´t. Tri X has now a very thick film base, at least in Europe, and it is for me in its 120 version very difficult to load on SS reels. <br /> <br /> Manufacturers do change the film base from time to time and Ilford HP5 is very easy to load now while I found it a disaster a couple of years ago.<br /> <br /> Of course life is easier when you practice in room light first. <br /> <br /> Best tip I heard: There should always be a little back and forth play in the film as you load; this is a sign that the film is loaded between the reel spirals and can move freely and is not stuck between the spirals. Best to check this while loading after each couple of rotations.</p>

<p>Hans, when I saw your name I thought you might be Dutch, hence the answer.<br /> <br /> Lately I hear from several people (also pros) in the central urban area of The Netherlands that they suffer from problems similar to yours. Word is it has to do with the changing composition of tap water.<br /> <br /> I use now distilled water for all solutions and the last rinse (with 2 drops of wetting agent for 35mm film) and boiled water for presoak (if desired) and the rinsing cycle (ilford regime of refilling and inversions). This seems to improve the situation somewhat.<br /> <br /> It appears that in The Netherlands special care should be taken to avoid dust from settling on the drying emulsion. I processed thoudand films or so in the Middle East (hot, dusty, lots of sand) and had maybe two iritations because of dust. <br /> <br /> The first films I developed in The Hague looked as if they had been left to dry in the vacuum cleaner while I used the same workflow. It may have to do with pollution or old houses with cracks and holes with dust and uncontrolled airflows. <br /> <br /> You may also use a water vaporizer as used to spray plants to moisten the air causing the dust to settle in the area where you hang the negatives to dry; also avoid brisk movements and closing doors briskly to avoid strong air flows.</p>

<p>I can not but agree with Steve's remark. I do black and white mostly. I looked for a wide angle to complement my Summicron 35 type I Wetzlar of which I love the rendering. After some research and advice from the forum I bought the VC 21/4.0 LTM and I am extremely happy with the way it renders. Below an example of my first test rol with the 21</p><div></div>