farhad

<p>Having both Nikon and Hasselblad V systems, I'd definitely buy one of these adaptors, if only they allowed vertical shift. Shift lenses for Nikon are real expensive, and the larger image circle of Medium Format would really come into it's own there...</p>

<p>Hi there,<br>

The colours on my negative scan are TOTALLY off with this crazy blue cast and super grainy as though I'm viewing it on a seventies colour TV. Here's my set up:<br>

Microtek i900 Scanner connected using Firewire to:<br>

iMac g5 with OSX Tiger 10.4.11<br>

Microtek Scanwizard Pro 7.62 (Latest version, downloaded today).<br>

The film is Fuji Reala 35mm 100ASA and I've chosen that in Scanwizard.<br>

This software seems to be SUPER buggy and unintuitive. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong, any ideas?<br>

Thanks,<br>

Farhad</p>

<div></div>

<p>Ok, I bought the 120 film holders from betterscanning.com and I can highly recommend them. Quite modular in that they allow you to vary the size of the frame (645,66,67, etc). I found the company to be very straightforward and honest, and I don't think they'd sell you anything if they weren't sure it would work for your needs. The Microtek holders included for 120 film are absolutely useless and a waste of plastic. Of course if you can afford an Imacon scanner it's really the best.</p>

<p>One major factor that no one has touched upon is a style of shooting. If you've ever used a waist level finder for composing, you'll know it's supreme benefits over eye level finders, which are like looking through a peep hole. The Hasselblad offers a WLF, whereas images of the Leica hint at a non-removable prism, so no WLF option. Tripod work especially sees the benefit of WLFs.</p>

Certainly you can get selective focus with a 90mm. I've achieved it where I didn't want it, and learnt my lesson.

Rangefinder's quite unsuited for studio use. You really don't need AF either, as you'll be controlling lighting and hence aperture. What you do need is good composition, a WLF is a treat to compose with. Add digital compatibility and you're left with Mamiya RB, Mamiya 645, Hasselblad V (500 series), and Hasselblad H. Look on eBay and you'll get reasonably priced examples of all of the above. I personally am staying away from the Hasselblad H, as they're trying to tie you in to a proprietory system where you HAVE to use their backs. I prefer more open systems and standards. Buying new I'd look at the Sinar Hy6 (AF lenses tho).

A few things I should have mentioned:

I can't use photoshop as I'm enlarger printing.

The shot is being taken from head on (square to one facade of the building). No other facade of the

building is visible in the shot. I'm close enough that I have to tilt the camera bed upwards or I won't

get the top of the building. Hence the lens standard is and has to tilt upward in order to get the full building in view. The rear standard is parallel to the facade so straight lines are non converging.

At this point it now seems clear to me that the geometry of the set up cannot support Scheimpflug.

The ND filter idea was pretty creative though! Thanks for the feedback.

Firstly - I've looked for the answer to this, but can't seem to get it anywhere.

 

Task - To shoot a 3 storey building from street level, from up quite close to

the building. I need some of the street for foreground, and then the entire building

up to the sky with parallel lines (no convergence). Equipment is a Toyo 45A and

a Rodenstock 90mm f6.8 lens.

 

Problem is, to get everything sharp from where I'm taking the picture, I need

to stop down to f45, which slows shutter speed to a couple of seconds, causing

blurring of people. I wanted to use tilts to open up the aperture, but it seems

to me that I can't apply Scheimpflug as well as have parallel sides for the building.

Just want confirmation that this is right and I have to stop down to f45?

 

Thanks

It's very simple - they make the best lenses. If they were to make lenses for Nikon mounts - they'd see crazy sales even at

exhorbidant prices. Nikon only seems to focus (no pun intended) on zooms, and even their fixed lenses I'd be happy to

swap for a plush leica lens. Oh ya they also need to make a high res compact digital fixed lens camera - like the Sigma DP1 - essential.

David, It's a 148GB HD with 48GB of free space. Thanks

I'm finding the performance of my imac too slow for my image processing, and

want to upgrade. I'm using a:<br> G5 1.8GHz 20" imac with<br> 1.25GB DDR

SDRAM,<br> GeForce FX 5200 64MB graphics card<br> Tiger 10.4.10 <br> Photoshop

CS2<br> I typically open and edit 260MB TIFF files (large sized imacon scans

from Medium Format). These take ages to open, and also processing tasks such as

the grain reduction filter, take way too long.<br>

My first preference would be to stick with this computer and updgrade it. Would

increasing the RAM help? At present I have 2 chips: 256MB + 1GB. I could alter

this to 2 x 1GB = 2GB or RAM. The only thing is I'm not sure if it's the RAM,

the hard disk, or the graphics card that's slowing things down, so I don't want

to pay to double the RAM without being sure it will help. Also is there any way

to change the graphics card and would this help? Any PS reconfiguration

possible? Would editing off an external firewire drive be more effective than

the internal Hard Disk? I'd like to hear from someone who has experience with

this or a similar set up.

I've narrowed down my flash choice to the Sunpak 120j Auto for non dedicated use with a variety of

cameras and formats, digital and film. The main purpose is outdoor location lighting and as fill flash.

I'd like to buy it with the battery pack. I've checked on the net, and this flash seems only available from

the US. My question is does this battery pack work with 220 - 240 volts? As Sunpak doesn't seem to

market it outside of the US, it seems to me that it might only work with the US 110 voltage - is this the

casde? Also if it is available outside of the US, can anyone recommend a UK / European website where I

can order it from? Thanks

I've tried taping the negs to the supplied glass holder, but cannot get the film absolutely flat and am not happy with the results. I wouldn't recommend a Microtek flatbed scanner for 120 film scanning. I've ordered a betterscanning.com holder, hasn't arrived yet - let's see if it helps.

Has anyone had any experience using Dual MF film holders from www.betterscanning.com for scanning

strips of 120 film on the i900? I'm specifically interested in answers on the sharpness achievable. I

cannot seem to get sharp scans even from the 35mm film holders so am wondering if it's worth

buying the 120 holders from betterscanning.com. I know they negate the need for chopping up

my 6x6 negs into individual strips, but want good sharpness too. No speculators please, I need answers

from users who've used the i900 with these holders...and I'm not interested in moving to digital SLR's

either thank you.

Avoid the Mikrotek flat bed designs for MF, major sharpness issues, and film holder issues

too. See other posts.

I've got a Mikrotek i900 and have to warn you about what I see as a few major defects for

scanning film:<br>1. The 35mm holder just cannot seem to hold the film flat enough to

get a sharp scan<br>2. The MF holder requires you to cut your negatives up into single

frames of 6x6 or 2 frames of 645 - totally ridiculous. Additionally, I haven't scanned ONE

sharp image from negative since buying this scanner. The reflective scans work well

though. There is a company that sells improved MF holders, I haven't tried them, so do

your own research, but here's the link: <a href="http://www.betterscanning.com/

scanning/

usingagdual.html">http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/usingagdual.html</a>

I'm had exactly the same problem with my Mikrotek i900 and haven't been able to resolve

it in the 2 years I've owned it - JUST CANNOT GET SHARP SCANS FROM 35MM OR 120

FILM. The film holders for 35 and 120 seem incapable of holding film flat. Now I use it

only for the occassional relfective scan. There's a company selling modified holders -

haven't used them yet, but here's the link in case it helps: <br><a href="http://

www.betterscanning.com/scanning/usingagdual.html">www.betterscanning.com</a>

I agree, especially as more and more people are now using large (19"+) and high resolution monitors.

I agree, especially as more and more people are now using large (19"+) and high resolution monitors.

Anyone with experience of triX at EI200 in D76. I would appreciate any starting times/temperatures to experiment with. Can't find this detail on the Kodak site. I have to use D76, as I don't seem to be able to find any other developers in Bombay. Thanks...

I understand the theory about the lack of mirror slap being more stable, but I'd like to explore another factor...Using my F100, I find my fingers wrap around the RH grip and shutter button perfectly, this definetely helps me get a more stable shot, because I'm comfortable. With my M6 OTOH, it's just a bit too thin for my hand and I haven't got around to it yet. So don't think you can just rush out, buy a Leica RF and everything's sorted - horses for courses. I could consider buying the RH grip for the Leica, but then the whole idea was to get something compact and not bulk up...

Paul, I don't think I'll have a problem with underexposed shadows, as I'm exposing for the

shadows at the rated speed of 400. Because this is the first time I'm doing a Zone System

test, I chose N+2 to see the difference more clearly. Also my B&W printer here in Bombay

uses Multigrade paper, so no choice of paper contrast. There's no truly professional B&W

lab in Bombay. After these tests I want to do an N-1 / N-2 test choosing a high contrast

subject. Then I'll scan and compare the negatives along with a normal N development set

of negs to decide what I should use in my work in different situations. Thanks for the

input.

Paul, I don't think I'll have a problem with underexposed shadows, as I'm exposing for the

shadows at the rated speed of 400. Because this is the first time I'm doing a Zone System

test, I chose N+2 to see the difference more clearly. Also my B&W printer here in Bombay

uses Multigrade paper, so no choice of paper contrast. There's no truly professional B&W

lab in Bombay. After these tests I want to do an N-1 / N-2 test choosing a high contrast

subject. Then I'll scan and compare the negatives along with a normal N development set

of negs to decide what I should use in my work in different situations. Thanks for the

input.

Thanks for the responses so far. It's definitely not a contrasty scene. I've measured it accurately and know I need 2 more zones. I'll try n+60% then...

Background - I'm trying to incorporate the zone system in my b&w work, so am exposing

a 120 test roll of triX400. My spot readings tell me I need N+2 to acheive a full seven

tones. The shooting is in heavily overcast low contrast situations with natural light indoors

by a window.

Question - I couldn't find info anywhere for N+2 development times - should I use the

same times as pushed develoment at 1600 as recommended by Kodak on the box? btw I'm

using D-76. Kodak recommends 9.5 minutes in D76 at 20C for an EI of 1600.