martin_n1

<p>The RZ is a beast but I still suggest to choose the RZ (or another equal medium format camera) because I doubt you will be satisfied with the image quality of 35mm film (suggested Canon A). 120mm film is a lot more comparable to the 'digital' image quality of a Canon 5D. With 35mm film I get decent 8x10 prints and in a pinch a bit bigger but 120 film from a RZ is a different story.<br>

Like people have said what is required as a start: RZ Pro (I or II) body, 120 film back, waist level finder and appropriate lens (RZ 180mm or 250mm). What I would like to add is a light meter and tripod. A light meter is required for exposing film beacuse the waist level finder has no built-in light meter like the metering prism.For ambient light you can use almost any meter but for flash you need an ambient/flash meter.<br>

The RZ is reliable and the only problems I have had with it is some light leaks in the film back due to degraded foam seals, that I eventually have replaced myself.</p>

<p>I just got the SF USAF1951 test slide and I can report a measured optical resolution of 4400-4600dpi when scanning at 5300dpi. This limit drops with scanned resolution of 4000-4800dpi but these resolutions are still usable in a pinch. I am very happy that my sample of OF120 performs up to specification and is not a misaligned machine. I was lucky.</p>

<p>I have now bought a Mac Mini (i5) with 8GB of RAM. After testing this setup it seems that Silverfast 8 performs much better on this setup. When testing frames 6x7 at 5300dpi without iSRD or ME, I can now time them as 3 minutes scanning and about 3 minutes processing in Silverfast. Thats very nice and fully acceptable to me. I have also had to leave my Lightroom workflow. I save files on a NAS drive and Lightroom struggles with the previews at 5300dpi on every image inspected. By the way I save JPEGs for getting acceptable read speeds. I discovered that CaptureOne 7 handles these networked files MUCH better than Lightroom and I can now use 5300dpi 6x7 without struggle in CaptureOne 7. So now I can recommend CaptureOne and Mac Mini with 8GB.</p>

<p>Thanks a lot for the info. I scan at 5300dpi becuse its the optical resolution and I don't want to scan again soon. In my opinion the scanner outresolves the film, so that 5300dpi would be very nice if only the films could resolve more and have smaller grain. The sharpness is quite gorgeous. However, I can't even dream about using ME or iSRD currently. I do like the Silverfast UI and file quality and would never consider Vuescan if it was not for the devastating in-memory operation lags in Silverfast.</p>

<p>>> Nikkanen<br>

My machine has 4GB of memory and Silverfast crashes EVERY time i try to do ME(multiple exposure) at 5300dpi. It can't substitute virtual memory and I have had discussions with Silverfast about this and they say they won't or can't fix it.</p>

<p>>> Halvorsen<br>

What is your processing time with mac mini at 5300dpi ? Have you timed it ?</p>

<p>Martin</p>

<p>>> Vincent van Walt<br>

Hello<br>

I can believe this is a Windows PC problem. I compared my present machine with AMD AthlonII, 4GB RAM and Windows 7 to a laptop with i3, 4GB RAM and Windows 8 and there was no significant improvement in processing speed. The german review probably used a Windows PC with i7 and 8GB RAM and they measured the processing speed almost exactly as my results on a much older PC. It could be Silverfast is somehow not optimized for Windows. Maybe I have to buy a MacMini.</p>

<p>I am very happy with my Plustek OpticFilm 120 bought from the Finnish distributor. The scanner is extremely fast, scanning a 6x7 frame at 5300dpi without iSRD takes about 3 minutes. However I am disappointed with the software Silverfast 8 because when the scanning is finished Silverfast goes into processing stage and uses up all the computers processor and memory resorces and still this crunching 'Processing' takes 35 minutes. This is ten times the amount of time for the scanner to do its job and clearly unacceptable. One german review stated this scanner is slow but in my opinion the scanner is very fast but Silverfast 8 is very slow and inefficient. And all this without using the Silverfast functions iSRD, SRD, ME, GANE and USM. If Silverfast can not sort out how to get the software to process the images faster my only hope is that there will be VueScan support for OF120. The results from Silverfast 8 are quite good, but I do not have time to wait for software that processes the image forever.</p>

<p>Yet another check - is the camera somehow in multiple exposure mode ME called and that mode is set and canceled a bit differently on each AF(D)I-III models ?</p>

<p>I have now checked the instructions and they state that the film indeed should advance automatically to frame 1 - NOT by pressing the shutter button like I wrongly stated in my first answer.</p>

<p>Then there is the pressure plate in the film insert - it can be in one position for 220 film in another position for 120 film. Does the camera make any noise when pressing the shutter release - ie could the film motor be running normally and not just the mirorr-shutter sounds?</p>

<p>If I remember correctly you have to press the shutter release on THE BODY to make an automatic advance to frame 1. Whitout pressing the button the film is not advanced to frame 1 'automatically' like electronic 35mm cameras. After you have advanced the film the film counter starts with 1... and this time if you press the shutter release the camera makes the first exposure. There is no motor in the film back - you have to have fresh batteries in the body.<br>

//EDIT If this does not work the body or film back could be faulty like you suspected.</p>

<p>Great sample pic, Meisner.<br>

Thanks for sharing.<br>

Sound really great to be able to print 100x80cm.<br>

I have not yet printed bigger than a3+ but my opinion is still that when looking at 100% scan with my lens there is a big difference in sharpness between the 50mm non ULD and the 110mm for example.</p>

<p>I don't have the ULD - yet. I'm discussing the old 50 Z-W lens.</p>

<p>It's good to have confirmed the behaviour of this lens. I really think Mamiya should have left the lens on the design table until a better lens could have evolved. Good that the ULD seems to be a better lens, hopefully producing acceptable results. Some of the webstores I usually visit don't have used ULD lenses for now, so they seem to be put to good use. Maybe I will somehow find an acceptably priced copy.</p>

<p>Hello<br>

I have aquired a RZ set with some lenses. After testing the different lenses I am VERY disappointed with the Sekor Z 50/4.5W. When I set the focus on RZ to infinity (bellows all turned to minimum extension) I get very soft pictures with the lens. However it seems that with some bellows extension and near-subjects I could get acceptable results in the near field. Is the lens faulty or is it normal behaviour for this lens ? Have anyone examined scans at 100% magnification taken with this lens focused on infinity ? I cannot think my RZ is faulty or the bellows rack because with 110 and 180 lenses and infinity focus I get sharp results. Should I perhaps buy another sample of the 50mm or fork out money for the 50mm ULD when I can find one ?</p>

<p>OK Thank You VERY MUCH !!<br>

That red line was the thing I had missed. Now it's working.<br>

Yes ! </p>

<p>Hi<br /> I have not been able to find out how to use the cable release socket on the 150 and 55 N/L leaf shutter lenses. When used normally with the settings automatic aperture (A) and manual cocking of the leaf shutter (M) the lenses fire normally in sync with the Super/Pro on 1/8th of a second focal plane shutter.<br /> But how can I fire the lenses with the cable release socket built-in on the lens ?<br /> Whatever I try, the cable release never seems to fire anything at all.<br /> Also on my mind is how to use the mirror lock-up with the lenses and when I actuate the mirror lock-up on the camera body the lens fires soon after the leaf shutter wind-up action, all by itself. This seems very strange.<br /> Thanks for informing me.</p>

<p>I look forward to the Plustek Opticfilm 120 medium format scanner and hope that I can afford it when available. The suggestions on probable performance parameters sounds perfectly appropriate and inviting to me and my only criteria for buying a new scanner is that it should be able to handle 120 film strips and that the resolution and Dmax/Drange are 'one generation' better than my Opticfilm 7500 SE. I believe that Drange is much more important than absolute maximum resolution. My 7500 has Dmax of 3.5 and that is far too modest. If this new 120 scanner betters or equals Nikon on some parameters that will be a nice bonus. I will not buy a Pacific Image / Reflecta current scanner because of their limited resolution of 3200ppi and Dmax and I will also not buy a Nikon because of its high price. My prefered scanning software is Silverfast, however I am seriously concerned about the bad implementation of Negafix profiles and the high cost of the software that has not evolved much in the last years. Why is Silverfast so slow and cannot do multisampling 'on the fly' without rescanning the complete frame ? An expensive software like Silverfast should have tackled performance problems early and the whole software motor core should have been revritten for more speed and better functionality a long time ago. I want better GANE, fast multisampling & multiexposure on the fly and advanced sharperning and grane reduction on the same time, not just either one. IMO Silverfast 8 seems just to be a pretty skin for the old Silverfast. A rewrite is tedious but really important for performance gains. Now my only real concern is if Opticfilm 120 will fit my budget.</p>