Rick Helmke

I never actually measured but always seem to be about the same distance from the subject using those format/lens combinations. The framing remains the same or close to the same. The 105 will give a little less background blur than the 180 all else being equal but the longer the lens the more the background drops out of focus at a given distance. At a distance of say 15 feet the image will be about the same crop ie a headshot with the 105 on a 35 format and a 180 on an RB67 a which is 2 1/4 x2 3/4 format. The 180 will have less dof and a more blurred background. Rick H.

When I was doing a lot of film we were using an automated processor that agitated the film constantly. It was fine with E6 and kept very good temperature control. Doing any b&w film yielded a noticeably denser negative than using a stainless steel tank and manual agitation every 30 seconds. I prefer that result and continue to use those times and temps. Rick H.

I think everyone is over complicating the question. An 80/2.8 will give less depth of field than a 50, 35, 28 and so on at a given aperture. A 180 will give even less, a 300 less than the 180 and a 500 even less. Format doesn’t change that. The problem is that a ‘normal’ focal length lens may be an about a 28 or 35 on a crop format but is a 50 on a 35mm size frame. The 80 is ‘normal’ on a medium format, 2 1/4 square or 2 1/4 by 2 3/4. The 80 gives less dof at a given aperture whether it’s on crop frame or medium format. The 150-180mm is a medium format portrait lens and gives less dof than shorter lenses. I love the Mamiya 180 on an RB67 the same way I like the 105/2.5 Nikkor on 35mm film/full frame sensor. With either setup the distance to the subject at that focal length causes backgrounds to blur out while delivering razor sharp images of the subject. It’s pretty straightforward really, just takes some practice. Rick H.

I can’t speak to the density of the frame numbers but that’s how I’ve done Tri X since the 70’s. My preference doesn’t always agree with the manufacturer but it works for me. Rick H.

Good move! The F4s is the only camera that could replace the F2 for me and I still have a couple loaded and ready. The controls on the F4 are how I prefer them to be laid out, no command dials, menus and so on. I’ve gotten more accustomed to those setups but still would love to see a digital F2 or F4. Rick H.

Nothing wrong with emulating Ansel Adams, his work is stunning. So is this one. I’ve been doing b&w film since the mid 70’s and want to add 4x5 to my work. I’d like to learn the zone system as well. Keep it up, this is excellent. Rick H.

I’ve processed hundreds of rolls of Tri X in D-76 and Acufine and it’s clear you are either under developing or your developer is bad and that’s not likely. Shoot a test roll and run it at about 70F, 1:1 for about 13 minutes. You should be fine. If the letters and numbers are still under developed then try a new batch of developer. Rick H.

I’ve not been bitten by the mirrorless bug and don’t plan to go that way. What I’ve found about Nikon bodies going all the way back to the F2 is that the flagship bodies are easier to use than the next level down. You don’t have to pay attention you can simply go to work. This is true of the F2, F3,4,5 and 6, they are all easier to use than the Nikkormats, the FM and FE bodies and the N90 and F100. You pay attention to what you are photographing and the aperture and shutter speeds don’t distract you. Same is true in my experience with the flagship digital and the next level down. The camera doesn’t get in the way of making photographs. All that said, I would get the D4. It’s a bit bigger and heavier but after all this time I am still able to carry two around all day. It’s fast, smooth, fits my hand and gets the job done. As for what cards it uses I don’t think it matters. Rick H.

Agreed, absolutely. Rick H.

It will be fine with rabbit ears on a DP-2, required actually. That’s a pre-AI camera that uses the rabbit ears to function with the meter. Rick H.

Actually Joe if I put a viewfinder from another F4 on this body it runs fine. I had the shutter replaced but this camera either got used very heavily, got dropped or got used as a hammer. Rick H.

I have an F4s that was heavily used before I got it and apparently there is not a good tight connection between the prism and the rest of the body because at times I have to push a bit forward on the back of the prism to get it to make an exposure. I have two others in much better condition and they all seem to work fine on the SB 24 and 25. As I often do I disagree with Joe about the F4, it’s the only camera I ever liked as well as a motor driven F2. Weighs less and quieter and fits my hand. A lot of pros disagreed at the time. Rick H.

Interesting, I still shoot film simply because I enjoy it. I play vinyl records and enjoy that too. I haven’t gone back to 8 track and vhs yet. I use tube radios of different kinds, I even have a Zenith Trans Oceanic I can use to listen all over the world. Lemming life? Such nonsense. Old doesn’t mean useless. Rick H

For the record I don’t care for this new organizational arrangement. I’m so accustomed to the older way that this is just annoying. Maybe I’ll get used to it. Rick H.

All of the classic manual camera groups are in one group, all the brands of modern film are together. I’ve done something wrong.

Something odd is going on.

Must have been my fault, it’s back to normal. I need a drink.😵

Has something just changed or I am I losing my mind? All of a sudden all the forums are showing up in a different organizational format. Did I hit a button wrong or has there been a change? Rick H.

I can’t think of his name but The Photographic Eye can be interesting and doesn’t get all into being a gear head. The Northrop’s and Snap Chick used to be about photography but it looks like sponsorships have made them much more about equipment. Dixie Dixon was fun, Jared Polin is just over the top obnoxious to the point that anything useful just gets lost. I’m starting to think I should get back to photography and away from YouTube. Rick H

I’ll check into it tomorrow, thanks. Rick H.

Ok here’s what I have: no photo but there is a Coolscan 4000 that has a FireWire plug and that’s a permanent installation. The other is a Coolscan 4 and that’s the one I’ve used quite a bit with Windows XP. The two Mac computers are an I Book G-4 on Mac OS X 10.4.11. And an I Macdesktop with a Retina display. It has recently been updated to Monterey 12.6 about six months ago but is updating right now to Ventura 13.2. It dates back to 2017 and does not have a FireWire receptacle. Talking with a friend earlier today who is more computer literate than me he indicated that Nikon should have made a Mac version of software for both scanners but he doesn’t have any Mac compatible software. Maybe Nikon or someone else has software that will work such as what is described above. Rick H.

Sorry, haven’t been back to this post. I’ll get a pic of the plug tomorrow and post it here like I should have done to start with. My apologies. Rick H.

Evening everyone, I’m looking at a Nikon Coolscan and have a software problem. The one I’ve been borrowing has software that only works with Windows XP and maybe Windows 7. There is another one available locally that’s been refurbished but doesn’t use a USB plug. I don’t know how to describe the plug it uses but the only computer I have with the correct port is a MacBook 4. Is there a Mac compatible version of software for the Coolscan series? Nikon doesn’t support this tech any longer of course but if they ever did then there ought to be a copy available or downloadable somewhere on the planet. I don’t know, maybe my old Dell desktop has a proper receptacle but I haven’t looked. Ideas? Thanks. Rick H.

I had a few things I wanted to photograph this afternoon so I took an F2a and a 300 to the RC field and got some shots that autofocus has never been able to handle well. Then I got out an N90S with a very old Vivitar 80-200 and finished a roll of b&w I want to process. That Vivitar is remarkably sharp considering it’s a budget level unit from probably the 70’s. The funny part was going through two 12 exposure rolls of Kodacolor with an MD-2. Doesn’t take long. It reminded me of what first drew me into all this. Rick H.

I’m not taking the time to read through all of this so I’ll just say that I recently completed a scanning job of about 800 slides going back to the early 50’s. I doubt they were stored all that carefully and all are in some sort of paper mount. There were no focus problems involving the scan process but the photographer let a few get away. Buy, rent or borrow a Nikon Coolscan and go to work. If the slides aren’t perfectly flat you should be fine. Rick H.