casper_murtonen

I've had a 5400II for a week or so and have been trying to familiarise myself with it. It seems like a nice unit with surprisingly good resolution (I would guess about 3600).

I too find the scans to be underexposed and to have poor colour accuracy. Reds have a magenta tint, dark greys/near black a blue tint.

The most accurate results with my 5400II seem to be had by scanning without colour correction and then adjusting levels in PS, as well as bumping up the midtone RGB values with the curves tool. Alternatively if the Minolta Posilinear profile is (wrongly) assigned to a (nonlinear) scan in PS the results are acceptable, or just about.

Johnny, you might notice that if you allow the Minolta software to do the colour space conversion you get a vastly different result (look at the RGB histograms separately in PS) than if you don't and then use PS to do the conversion. On some of my scans the Minolta software drops the green channel completely (RGB G value of 0) for a whole range of dark reddish colours - hence an obvious magenta cast.

I was of the opinion that something was wrong, probably software, and contacted Minolta. They have had me send the unit back to them for repair/calibration.

I carry a similar set of lenses etc often, at about 10-17kg (22-37lb) total (including pack) depending on whether I carry longer lenses or not and whether I need rain gear or not. With a good pack that fits well it is not uncomfortable to wear for a whole day, 5-20km or so. With my previous cheap pack I would not carry more than 4-5kg, and after a days' outing even that felt rather uncomfortable.

Of course I don't *need* all these lenses and accessories, but I enjoy having the choice to use which lens I want when I want. Sometimes I use every lens I carry. And surprisingly often I return not having used any.

I like the "Top Rated Photographers" concept as it provides direction for those pointless perusals through the photo.net galleries.

However, it seems to me that the desire to be near the top of the "Top Rated Photographer" list drives many to exploit the current numerical rating system. Perhaps the metric used to determine the top-rated photographers could be improved upon so that it was not easily open to bias.

I would suggest normalisation of each photographer's scores - BUT ONLY FOR CHOOSING TOP RATED PHOTOGRAPHERS - not for general perusal (ie the normalised scores would not be published, just used internally; the raw scores would be published for all other uses).

I can't speak for the Cokins, but seems photo.netters almost universally regard them as cheap substitutes for the real thing. Their catalogues/example photos/website don't imbibe me with any confidence, I might add.

I bought a couple of Hitech GND filters based on the good opinions of many on photo.net. Imagine my dismay when, the first time I used them, the slides came back with a magenta cast. They look *ok*, the cast is not obvious to everyone, but it's there and annoys me. Upon more careful examination it's pretty obvious that the filters have a cast.

The Australian dollar is still falling. I'm waiting for it to rise a little before I order some Singh-Rays...