michael_radika

Sounds great Ed I can't wait to pick this up and start shooting think I'm going to go with the batis.

I own no D SLR lenses at all I'm starting from scratch. I read that the sigma art 85 1. 4 outperforms the G master pretty handily. the Sony 85 1. 8 gets pretty good reviews my first land is going to have to be a portrait lens. For a little bit more I can get the Zeiss batis 85 1. 8 performed very well on the Sony.

Thank you for your reply and it sounds like this is probably the camera I'm going to get as as far as Sigma art lens is down they are now in Sony e-mount so they should be fully functional with everything the camera will do you don't need an adapter.

Hey thanks for the reply he does very nice work I don't know what that device is he's using on the Mamiya RZ lenses not practical for me. The Sony a7r is plagued with Shutterstock it has to be mounted I'm massive tripod I own that camera before very hard to get good shots don't like it. I do appreciate the information I need to find some of this actually using the a7r II with the sigma art lenses. Yeah Clyde does some really nice work for sure I'm more into portraits than landscape. I do appreciate your reply.

Thank you

I'm thinking of purchasing a Sony a7r II I know it's a little bit behind the times that the latest greatest but this pretty good prices on this camera. I'm looking for users of this camera I'd like to purchase this camera and run the new Sigma art lenses with the Fe Mount that are made for the Sony cameras I'm wondering how the focus is how the eye auto focus is just looking for General feedback on anybody that has this combination. Thanks again I appreciate any feedback that anybody can give me.

I'm going to have to disagree with you Ed about that if you're talking about the Nikon d5000 and I come in and start another thread in the middle of your thread about the Sony a7r that's jacking your thread completely disagree with you and I think a lot of other people would. To each their own whatever. it's very disrespectful.

I agree I mean my thread has gone in a complete 180 degree different direction basically It Got Hijacked.

I'm kind of curious about this camera I've heard nothing but good things about this Olympus. I was in Samy's Camera the other day and I'm starting to look at this camera and the guy showed me two 17 by 22 Prints side by side. He asked me if I could tell him which one was from the Olympus and which one was for from a Canon full-frame 24 megapixel camera. They were so close I could hardly tell the difference I chose the wrong one ,five other people chose the wrong one which just shows how good this camera actually is. The salesman went on to tell me that he sold all of his Nikon gear to get this camera it seems rather pricey for a micro 4/3. Curious to get some feedback from you guys some of you have had this camera for a little while what's your how do you rate it what's your feedback on this camera is it as good as I'm hearing?

Wow that this thread go off in a weird Direction. No I did a lot of comparison a lot of looking at some prints from a dark room that were printed off of negatives and then scanned prints that were printed off of inkjet some different type of p printers I much prefer the look of the darkroom prints. But way too much trouble to do dark room prints so that takes care of that. I'm actually deciding between the Fuji xt2 or the Pentax K1 Mark 2. Kind of leaning towards the Pentax the Pentax has got some very interesting features and it's a full-frame 36 megapixel.

I'm not being forced over to digital it's just in my experience I don't like the look of scan negatives I don't like the end result. Maybe some people are happy with it I'm not happy happy. Again like I said maybe it's just my lack of experience in the in the not in the film camera world. I'm not going to go through all the trouble processing my film having to have it scanned and go through all that in the end I'm not getting the look I want it's way too much work to not be happy in the end. If I had a a way to use a dark room or I can set up a dark room at home I would be a happy camper tons of experience in the dark room. It's just in my humble opinion scanning negatives is defeating the purpose of shooting film it took me some time to learn that. Time to go full digital. I examine prints from somebody at my local camera shot its scans are negatives and print them digitally I didn't like the look of any of his work some of the actual shots were good but the process to look in the end was not good.

Yeah I talked to some local photographers at my local camera shops talk to a guy that shoots film scans actually saw some of his work don't like it don't like the look I'm not going to even waste my money taking and having my negatives professionally scanned I already saw some results from a very good photographer it's not what I'm looking for. If you're going to shoot film in my opinion you you print it in a dark room trying to mix digital with film is like oil and water to me. Unfortunately it was a costly lesson I'm definitely going to lose money in all of this but I gained a lot of experience. Sony a7r II or Fuji xt2 here I come. No more back and forth that's it I'm done anybody you you film guys my stuff will be on eBay this weekend I'll post a link. I love this forum thank you guys for all of your help and encouragement and everything I really appreciate it.

Ok thanks

Have a question for you guys the place I'm going to have scanned take my -2 and have it scanned the guy told me it's going to be like a 35 40 megabyte file. How do I figure out what that translates into megapixels is it going to be like 3500x5000 what I'm trying to find out is what am I going to end up with a 20 megapixel file 15 what's the formula to figure that out?

Have a question for you guys the place I'm going to have scanned take my -2 and have it scanned the guy told me it's going to be like a 35 40 megabyte file. How do I figure out what that translates into megapixels is it going to be like 3500x5000 what I'm trying to find out is what am I going to end up with a 20 megapixel file 15 what's the formula to figure that out?

Wow again I say wow sounds like a p i t a for scanning negatives. I don't want a Nikon Coolpix 9000 that no one can service or there's no parts I'm not ready to go down that road sounds like the Epson scanners although they keep changing the numbers on them they don't get any better. I did speak with a guy today and a lab close to where I live I can't remember the name of the scanner that he has its back from like 2005 it's a dedicated film scanners not a flatbed it's not a drum scanner it's a Norawich or something like that. He says he can give me very high res scans at a reasonable price he gave me the price list it was very very reasonable for the size of the files that he was going to give me in return I'm going to take a couple of my 120 negatives and give him a try just to see what it looks like I'm just curious I have to check it out compared to a lot of other places he's very reasonably priced is a 5.0 star rating from customers I spoke with him on the phone for 30 minutes soundssounds like it could be a good situation I got to give it a try I will not be purchasing a scanner after all of the negative s*** I've been reading. Depending on the scan that this guy's going to give me I may just process my own negatives at home and send them over to this guy to scan he emails me the files and I go from there. I will not be going down the buy my own scanner Rabbit Hole from all the stuff I've been reading here I'm not willing to invest the money in that. I don't mind mailing or dropping off my negatives to a local lab if they can give me good high quality scans that could be an option. I'm going to take some negative some black and white negatives over to this guy on Friday and but I'm do some scans email them back to me and then I'm going to kind of go from there. But thank you guys I've read enough I will not be buying a scanner I will not be dropping a thousand or 1500 dollars on a scanner I'd rather pay a lab that is already set up with a dedicated scanner as long as it's reasonable I think this guy that I've been speaking to is going to charge me like five or six dollars negative that's fine I'm not going to send the whole roll to him whatever shot I take and I think it's halfway decent I'll have it scanned sounds like a decent option.

Ohhu ok got you.

No it doesn't sound like fun and I know the results from the v700 Epson where I go to my local Photoshop and they scan my negatives I'm not impressed at all. I think the answer is either take my negatives in print them in a dark room or move on to a digital camera. I have no space for a darkroom at all I'm not setting up a dark room in my bathroom sticking towels under the doors I'm not doing that if I had a dedicated space I would do it I'm not going half-hearted and having to keep tearing everything down if that doesn't work for me. The local darkroom is a good 30 minute drive it's 15 bucks a day which it's not bad but it's kind of a hassle I'd like to be able to do everything from inside my house. I'm just getting a lot of negative in a lot of mixed results on scanners it really looks like digital just makes more sense at this time in my life I would love to set up a dark room in my house that would be my first option but it's not possible.

I have a question for you guys if I had $1,000 to spend on a scanner dedicated or flatbed what would you say the best scanner that I can get $1,000 I'm only going to be doing 120 film. I'm thinking Epson v750 doing wet mounts or the Nikon l -8000. I want to do some experimenting before I completely give up on this.

You're right shooting film what is the point of scanning film if you're shooting film to achieve the film look. I'm no expert in Lightroom not by any stretch of the imagination. My question is through scanning processing in Lightroom and then printing how close can you get to to achieving what a film print looks like on film paper. 60% 70% 80% maybe it's just my lack of skills that I can't achieve the look that I want maybe it's a Chiva Bowl but I don't have the ability to do it.

I print mostly black and white stuff what type of paper are you using I've been using the ilford Gallery prestige gold fibre silk or something like that. Course I just got the printer not that familiar with it and I cannot seem to get Canon Studio to work.

Okay I am yet to achieve that but if you're telling me I can get that film look through my Canon printer I be a happy camper. 4 inch by 6 inch Prince are not near enough I want to do 5 x7 8 x10 and 13 x19..

I appreciate all your guys responses. I haven't sent out and have somebody print it maybe I should try that like the first poster mentioned that he sends his stuff out to a lab. Maybe it's the inkjet printing that's killing it for me I really haven't narrowed it down because I don't have any other type of Prints to compare it to. I process my own film here at home my black and white stuff that's not a big deal simple to do I enjoy doing that. I don't own a scanner I have not invested in a scanner yet I've been paying a shop a local camera shop here a dollar a frame to scan and it's off of epson v700. I'm having a hard time narrowing down what it is that's bothering me obviously it's not the film cuz I love the film I love the look of film when it's printed in a dark room I know that much. But I think when I see it on the screen scanned into Lightroom and I'm playing around with it it looks fine so maybe it's the type of printing I'm doing that's kind of destroying the look for me. You know I'm I'm frustrated I hate to give up because I have a little bit of money invested in in my bronica system. I went through all the focusing issues managed to solve that and now I'm facing this this new issue. I think I should take the advice of the first guy that posted them responded to my thread and send something out and seesee what see what that looks like so I have something to put side by side with my inkjet prints. I have the Canon Pixma pro-100 I did print some digital files that I had and and they turned out fabulous for the digital look the printer did it a fabulous job. Then again it doesn't have that film look that I'm after but as far as the digital look goes it looked fantastic. So maybe the inkjet printer is the culprit of my problems I'm going to send out and have a print made and see what it looks like. Now the drawback to sending out stuff is I have no control I'm at the mercy of the lab to achieve the look that I want I like to be able to control my printing I want to control the whole process. I think I'm going to send out one of my files and have it printed and have a print sent to me and evaluate it as last effort and put the prince side by side with the inkjet and at least find out what the problem is.

Some of you know me on here some of you don't you know the struggles I've gone through with my medium format camera finding focusing screens struggling to focus trying to find diopters for my camera to help me Focus. I think I've come to a conclusion that film is no longer worth the trouble. Don't get me wrong I do love film I love processing film I love the look of film when it's printed in a dark room. What I found out through all this experience is I do not like the look of film when it is scanned into Lightroom and then printed out on an inkjet printer it loses that film look. I find the process of shooting the film developing the film and then scanning it and then printing it on an inkjet printer it comes up with a kind of a weird look to me that I don't like. I don't have time nor the space to set up a dark room to print my film with and a enlarger and doing the whole darkroom scene it's just not going to happen. Between the struggles of focusing the camera which I seem to have solved this problem with my focusing screen and I did find the correct diopter for my camera I seem to have pretty much fixed the focusing issue not 100% but pretty close. I think the bottom line is you need to buy an $800 scanner you need to buy the wet mounting stuff and the film holders for the scanner you need the price of film the price of all the chemicals to develop the film and and in the the end you end up with this sort of half digital half film look that I just don't like. I'm sure if I had the money and the time and the space I would love to set up a dark room and print with an enlarger with my negatives that I know would make me happy but that cannot happen I think it's time to move on to digital. No rolls of film no chemicals to develop no scanner needed yes I won't get that film look that film look that I'm after. But then again the cost of film, chemicals, scanners if you want to print something really big and really nice you need to go Fork out $70 to have a drum scan done and what's the point. To me old medium format and large format film don't mix well with the digital age if you have a drum scanner in your garage it could be a different story I'm not going to Fork out $50 every time I want to have something drum scanned to get some decent detail to make a large print. It's been a painful expensive experience and I do love film I will always love film I love to process film I love shooting film but to me the end result of not being able to print in a darkroom just defeats the purpose I don't like scanners I don't like printing scanned images on a inkjet printer I just don't like the look. I'm going to simplify my life and buy myself a Fuji xt2 and go digital. I think the stubbornness of trying to hold on to film for the whole Nostalgia thing and the whole process it's just not worth it it's time to surrender and go digital and learn to like it. Thank you everybody for your advice and your help to help me get through all of this it took some time some money and some effort but I think I'm going to be a lot happier buying myself a digital camera.

Yeah that's not going to work here there's no way I can print it home it's not going to happen. I'm going to get some really good scans done by somebody and see how I like it and go from there if I don't like it then I will go 30 minutes away to the place where I can rent the dark room very very $15 a day.