al_derickson

<p>What kind of film? Slide or negative? Are you looking at prints or scanned images?</p>

<p>I agree that it is a 3.5E K4C produced from 1956-59. These supposedly have serial numbers from 1,740,000-1,787,999 and 1,850,000-1,868,999. This data is from The Classic Rollei - a definitive guide by John Phillips.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>PSE 12 got an update to 12.1 and PSE 13 almost immediately got an update to 13.1 so they still do bug fixes.</p> <p>I use Elements to process my scanned images. When I discovered the method to create layers on 16 bit images it became a lot more useful. Neat Image and Focus Magic work well with it and Elements+ adds additional functionality.</p>

<p>This is not a poll. I'm just curious about how big a product this is for Adobe compared to their professional products. I went to the Adobe investor site but I did not see this broken out. The comparison has gotten more complicated with the rise of Lightroom and the CC. Ideally I'd like to see how many current PSE (any version) users compared to LR/CS*/CC (any version) users.</p> <p>Has anyone seen numbers like these?</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>Your 17-55 and 55-300 are DX lenses and won't provide acceptable results on FX cameras such as the D610 and D750.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>It also worked properly for me when I tried it. Be sure you have the latest version. This might have been a bug in a previous version.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>I haven't used mine much yet but I agree with the point several people have made: this camera is really Nikon's response to pleas for a high quality DX prime wide angle lens. Sometimes I envision myself putting this little thing on a great big tripod and throwing on a black hood for a miniature view camera experience.<br> The image quality is really excellent.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>Colin, he doesn't need to take the main unit apart for this service, just the SR-21.<br> Pull the SR-21 out and push the little oval button on top so you can flip down the front. Then the plastic top comes right off. Use a blower and possibly some alcohol-moistened Qtips to clean the rubber rollers.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>No, I don't think you have overlooked anything. I have a Rollei I have worked on myself that has this problem. There is an adjustment inside the repairmen needs to make. I would return the camera to the seller.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>The one I did select in 1971: Rolleiflex 3.5F Whiteface</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>Of all the lens reviewers I've found Bjørn Rørslett to be spot on with the lenses I own. He says the AI 200mm f4 is great. I'd trust him.<br> <br> I own the old pre-VR 70-300 ED IF f4-5.6. I'm continually amazed how sharp it is at the long end. You can get this in excellent condition for less than $100. It's very lightweight, also.<br /><br> <br> Al<br /></p>

<p>Pike Place Market then ride the monorail to the Space Needle, see the EMP museum near the Needle and the Pacific Science Center. Back on the monorail to the Market and stroll the waterfront shops.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>I don't think there is any "correct" answer. It depends on your scanner, the scanning software you use and your personal preferences. My scanners and software provide me with a reasonably close scan with color negatives and I finish up with Photoshop Elements.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>I dropped my Gossen Super Pilot and cracked the window. I kept using it and never noticed a difference.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>This fellow had good results pushing Provia 100F to 400:<br> https://luminous-landscape.com/iso-400/</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>I have a 180mm f/2.8 AF ED (non-D) metal barrel Nikkor and am able to AF fine tune it on my D7100.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>I'm disappointed the new 300m won't work with my F6. I wonder if it is a hardware issue or it could be enabled with a firmware update. I wouldn't expect Nikon to issue firmware updates for old digital cameras but since the F6 is likely the last professional film camera doing so for it wouldn't cost them any sales.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>Lucky guy! You stole it at that price. Where the Planar really shines is with color so keep your Tessar for B&W.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>Scanning fluid is just naptha (Coleman stove fuel). Oil would make a horrible mess. I scan my 120 film at 4800 on my Epson V750 and resize them later down to 2400.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>For that amount of equipment I like a small sling bag like the Lowepro Slingshot 102. I find it great for moving through crowds in cities and it keeps your gear accessible. I don't like sling bags for heavier loads because the weight is on one shoulder. Shoulder bags are awkward in crowds and backpacks generally require dismounting to get at your stuff.<br> Al</p>

<p>This was my kit on my trip two years ago: http://www.photo.net/travel-photography-forum/00bUoc<br> The size of the bag meets the definition of a "personal item" so it can go onboard in addition to a carry-on.<br> I'm going again next month and will take basically the same thing with the addition of a 70-300mm f4-5.6 EDIF.</p> <p>Al</p>

<div></div>

<p>If the OP's lens is the non-AF-S version I sympathize with him. My 300mm f4 AF front focuses on every camera I tried it with, six so far, digital and film. I sent it in to be checked and it checked out fine. It does focus precisely in Live View on my D7100, otherwise it requires a AF fine tune setting of +20. It is tack sharp wide open when it is in focus.</p> <p>My solution so far is to adjust the mirror stop on my old D80 and a spare F100. That makes the 300mm focus correctly on these cameras but makes them inaccurate for all my other lenses except, curiously, my 180mm f2.8 AF, a lens very similar in design to the 300mm.</p> <p>Al</p>

<p>I'm surprised we're debating film vs digital when my question was about improving film scans. There is no question when I compared my scanned film images to my projected film images that a lot of data is being lost in scanning.</p> <p>Al</p>

<blockquote> <p>Second, the issue isn't resolution. At least not with a good scanner, and good scanning technique. Certainly not a drum scanner. The issue is range of tonality, or bit depth. It gets quite complicated, but it has to do with the smoothness of the print moving thru from one tone to the next. It is quite visible in b&w, which has always been more sensitive than color.</p> </blockquote> <p>I'm sorry, but bit depth doesn't play into it at all. When I project my slides I'm getting all the color my(very good) eyes can see. We are not talking about prints here or the scanned digital file; we are talking about the potential of film to hold information.</p> <p>Al</p>