bubo_bubo1

<p>Thanks Paul for the suggestion, good news there is such a cheap slide copier. Right now (as Les I think mentioned) I can't use Nikon equipment on my Pentax as Nikon has smaller flange distance but I plan to move to smaler mirrorless Fujis and I would be able to use Nikon stuff.<br> I ordered in the end a light pad (A4 size) and a Lomography DigitaLIZA 120 film holder. I will be hanging my camera on a very sturdy tripod veertically downwards to photograph the negatives. I gave up the idea of a tube between the lens and the negative as I've seen very good results on the web from people who didn't use it. I'll report back my results here.</p>

<p>Excellent short guide Michael<br> I will do pretty much the same thing except that I will use my tripod (a <a href="https://www.amazon.fr/gp/product/B004OYUDG4/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1">Vanguard Alta Pro 263AB100 </a>), it's one of those that are very "gymnastic", if I may say so, and I can invert the middle column so that the camera moves vertically downwards. </p>

<p>The idea you linked to <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=6506393">António Gomes</a> is so simple and looks very efficient! It even takes care of film flatness as a side effect of pressing it with the hood! Damn, why didn't I think of that myself first?! :D<br> I wil get myself a lightbox (or hack a screen) and whatever I need to try that super low-cost solution first. If that doesn't come out right for 35mm film I'll also get a Spiratone/Paragon extender but if all goes well I expect to be happy with 120 film scan resolution after stitching. </p> <p>Thank you all for the suggestions! </p> <p> </p>

<p>I'm also wondering if there is a way I could take multiple shots at my 6x6cm negatives and stitch them afterwards. I sort of doubt there is an easy to do way to achieve this, except for a DIY holder on which I simply move the negative around?</p>

<p>Wow, you all seem to have lots of info on this! (those old ads/leaflets)<br> <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=696354">Les Sarile</a>, I'm not afraid of post-processing DSLR scans - once I would get the settings right I could save them in a style and apply to all the future scans but I do expect quite a bit of experimentation until I'd be happy.<br> The Spiratones as suggested by <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=1841065">JDM von Weinberg</a> seem to have a fair price - I will probably get one even if it doesn't take 120 film. On eBay Europe I can find Panagor branded ones only - they seem to be exactly the same as Spiratones. </p> <p>I'm still open to suggestions if anyone knows a decently priced (like the Spiratone/Panagor) 120 film duplicator. </p> <p> </p>

<p>Thanks for the responses so far - I checked on eBay and this PB-4/PS-4 is too expensive for what I want to achieve. I didn't mention in the first post but I'm talking of <100$ investment in bellow + holder.<br> Apart from that, I couldn't figure out from the web but does the holder take 120 negatives? I suspect not but correct me if I'm wrong. </p>

<p>Hello forum,<br /> <br />I recently started shooting film and I have a few rolls of 35mm and 120(medium format) film developed - some were scanned at a local lab but they can only give me 6 mega-pixel scans.<br /> One way to do it myself would be to buy a 250€ Epson V600 or Canon 9000F but I think they are not very good for the tiny 35mm film. On top of that, for 35mm film those scanners could probably give me 3000x2000 resolution or so which might not be enough if I have a very good photo that I want to print big - like 60x40cm. <br /> <br />I found out the digitizing can also be done with a DSLR and a few accessories. I'm planning to build a relatively cheap setup - others have done it in a similar way and I really liked the results I've seen. For those of you who have done anything similar - I need your help with the elements that contain a star below.<br /> <br />In the order of their mounting:</p> <ul> <li>DSLR (Pentax K-50)</li> <li>Extension tubes (K mount)</li> <li>M-42 to K adapter</li> <li>Voigtlander 40mm f2 M42 with 52mm filter thread (superb lens, exceptional resolution but not macro - should work with extension rings)</li> <li>step-up/down from/to 52mm</li> <li>* bellows or tube</li> <li>* 120 and 35mm negative film holders (with diffuser)</li> <li>Light</li> </ul> <p>I've seen there is a product on the market called <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Polaroid-Slide-Duplicator-Capabilty-Digital/dp/B005UEN2Y2/ref=sr_1_15?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1424694058&sr=1-15&keywords=slide+duplicator">Polaroid HD Slide Duplicator</a>. The problem is that it can only take 35mm film in its negative holder.</p> <ol> <li>Is there something on the market such as this slide duplicator that offers 120 holder too?</li> <li>I could buy separately bellows + negative holders compatible with the bellows - do you know of such a combination that worked for you?</li> </ol> <p>Thanks</p> <p> </p>

<p>Thanks everybody again,<br> <br />I said above that I'm quite certain I'll be getting a Fuji 6x8 format rangefinder. <br> As for the Pentax 6x7 - I use a Pentax K-50 as my main (only) camera right now. They have good glass (some of the legacy, current limiteds, some medium format glass etc.). The problem with Pentax 6x7 is as others have said the weight and the shutter vibration and it's really out of the question for me.<br> <br />So for now I check patiently on eBay for a killer Fuji 680 deal (or Mamiya 6 or 7 :D but less likely to find one)</p>

<p>Nicely put Craig! Interesting info on those 8x10 marking tricks.<br> <br />Indeed, I was more concerned by the aspect ratio - composing when shooting. <br /><br /><br> After thinking about all these suggestions for which I thank you I have decided to save some $$ and search for a good Fuji GSW 680 deal.<br />The main reasons are:<br> - lightweight<br> - good optics, EBC coating<br> - 500$ used one, now on ebay, maybe less in near future<br> - 4:3 format in which I can directly compose the shots. Also easy to compose in square which I like alot (slight crop to obtain square compared to 3:2)</p> <p>Thank you everybody for involving!</p>

<p>Yes Jerry, Bronica looks good, they caught my eyes on several occasions but they seem a little bulky for what I need. I need to keep the weight low for hiking trips. I plan to hike only with the camera and a landscape lens.</p> <p>Ellis, Fuji's rangefinders seem to be the best deal I could get but the 6x7cm are really expensive. 6x9 is ok as price (a bit more than I would like to) but 6x9 cm is 2:3 format which it's too wide for my eye. I might end up getting a 6x4,5 from Fuji in the end (as you and many others say they are great cameras) but I keep looking to see if I can find that 6x7 I can afford.<br /><br />Rick, looking on ebay right now Fuji GF670 (the one with bellows) sells for 1600$ and GF670W (without bellows) sells for 2000$. I could only find the GW670 at about 1000$. Looks great to me as a camera but I need to find it somehow at half that price :D Is there any cheaper 6x7 model that I am missing here?</p>

<p>Hello community,<br> <br />I would like to do landscape with a medium format camera, on flim so I am looking for a lightweight camera - 6x7 format, that preferrably costs no more than 400$.<br> By lightweight I mean around 1kg max for camera+lens.<br> 6x7 is according to what I've seen the format that fits the best my style. 6x6cm is not bad either as a compromise. If I don't find any 6x6 6x7 that I like in this price range I would probably go 6x4,5cm as compromise because it's 4:3 which is not that wide.<br> I hate 3:2 from my current digital camera because it's too wide therefore Fuji 690 rangefinders are out of the question.<br> So, from what I've seen so far there aren't any 6x7 viewfinder cameras to fit the lightweight requirement.<br> I found however on Ebay many Fuji 645 format rangefinders (gs645, ga645 ... ) for 300$ in very good state - therefore they are cheap, lightweight, very good as a system (!!) but they are not 6x7. The Fuji gw670 is too expensive. Mamiya 7 as well.<br> The question is, do I have any options with these requirements?</p> <p><br />Allow me to thank you already for reading and answering this.</p>