Ray S

Thanks for your insights Ross. I’m also happy with the V550 thus far and I’m only scanning at 4800 dpi which likely outperforms the current film I’m using. J The one I saw was a Nikkor P-Mount lens which you actually answered in my other post. Thanks a bunch though! Thanks Rick. I’m not that worried about the cost of processing film at this point. I’m not shooting thousands of images as I would at a sporting event or a wedding with my dslr system. Plus I’m already developing both color negative, and b&w 35mm film at home (Paterson tank system). I’m looking at an MF camera for fun and to compliment/extend my 35mm film rangefinders, dslr’s, & fuji digital ICLS cameras. May as well work towards rounding out the skill set. Next I may even consider exploring large format although admittedly not being able to easily develop large format film at home is a deterrent. Thanks again! Ray

Hmm, I didn't realize it's the weight of the RB67! Wow, that one along with it's sibling RZ67 are monster sized LOL. I would like a 'blad' camera but like many really can't afford them especially when I'd want to pair with with a 30 or 40mm lenses which are so very expensive! So I was compromising by exploring the Bronica's. I'm also considering the Bronica GS1 since a wide lens is definitely available for just a few hundred as well as the Pentax 67 although it's SLR on Steroids look is something i definitely need to get used to. No, these are not my primary camera. I am shooting film because it's easy enough to develop now. I shoot primarily digital (Nikon D300s/500) with a plethora of lenses.

Unicolor C41 kit. The manufacturer does recommend using 110f water when I mix the chemistry so I did that. I used a Suse Vide machine to heat a water bath that everything sits in to the correct temp. I'm also using a calibrated thermometer (good friend is a chemist & he calibrates them for me) to ensure the distilled water is at 110f. :)

Interesting. Well I'm now in the market for an MF camera and have been reviewing the various formats, available camera brands making bodies for the various formats and the available lenses for each brand's body.

Hi Scott, Thanks for those insights. I'll definitely try them. I will note that previously I had used filtered tap water so this Sunday I made a 2nd set of developer & used DW for the the developer, blix, & stabilizer as well as for the rinse process when developing. For my latest batch of developed 35mm film the results are much improved. No more weird rings of splotches or even large arcs of white after the colors have been flipped. Now, I'm just getting strange near microscopic white dot's in my scanned & inverted image (which would likely mean black dots in the film). Literally they are tiny & nearly pixel sized. It's just an obvious WAG (wild a_ _ guess) but I'm now thinking it may be undissolved developer that's adhering to the film emulsion and not allowing it to be processed off when developing. Thus resulting in black spots in the negative which means white spots after flipping the image.

Does it have the same mount as modern Nikkor SLR lenses? Does this mean I can use some of my Nikon SLR lenses with an S2? TIA! Ray

Nice Ross! I just picked up an Epson V550 (same as V600 w/out the Photoshop Elements from what I understand). How fast are the scans? It's taking +30min to scan six 35mm frames @ 4800 dpi using the Epson V300. I was originally looking at the Pentax 67 but am also seriously considering the Bronica GS-1. Both offer inexpensive wide angle, normal, & macro lenses which match my needs nicely.

Edit: I forgot the Bronica also offers a similar lens range (wide & macro lenses) but I'm curious if anyone has further advice on other systems I should also be considering for Landscape (mostly) and possibly Macro photography that would be inexpensive to get into? Also I read mention of using Nikkor lenses for some of the other 6x7 bodies. Are these Nikkor MF lenses or 35mm lenses used with adapters to allow it to work with an mf body? Thanks again.

I've done quite a bit of exhaustive research of the various formats (645, 6x6, 6x7. 6x8, 6x9), brands for each and lenses for each system and their price range for used lenses. Literally a spreadsheet with 50+ columns and 50+ rows.o_O By far it appears that the Pentax 67 system is going to offer the greatest focal range available at an 'affordable' price (under 1k) for both wide angle & macro use. So I'll be on the hunt for one and will eventually post up once I find something. Thanks again all of your for the great advice.

Sorry I haven't gotten back to this over the last couple of days. So just to clarify...let me add that when i originally mixed my Unicolor C-41 developer solution, I simply used filtered water (Zero Water Filter system) which effectively uses a carbon filter and softens the water but is definitely not even remotely close to distilled water. In addition to that, I was using the filtered water for the rinse step. It's just a WAG but suspect our municipal water is chocked full of particulates so even after being filtered this may potentially be the source of my problems. I've just received another batch of Uncolor C-41 developer and will remix the solution, this time using distilled water for both the mixture and for future rinsing. I also purchased a film squeegee. I have a fresh roll of film to be developed and will try it all once again this weekend. Hoping for the best and thankful for everyone's responses! Will update with the results!

A good friend who worked at a commercial film developer in the San Jose, CA area said he just used his fingers. Someone else recommended using a real soft leather chamois to do it rather than a film squeegee. Well I hadn't been having issues with scratching the film using my fingers but I'm still getting strange water/development marks so I'm gonna have to do something different.

Like you, I also discovered that I can just use regular office supply binder clips. Not having an issue with curved film that putting them under a big heavy stack of paper for an hour or 2 doesn't resolve. Are you joking or is there really something you don't like about using rubber squeegee's?

Thanks all. Gonna try distilled water for the next roll I develop so I'll see if it get's rid of the problems. I'll also be using new developer and this time round will use distilled instead of filtered water for mixing up the developer/blix/stabilizer solutions. I hope this resolves it albeit using a gallon of distilled water per roll is gonna be a pita. I guess I'll be buying them 4-5 gallons at a time then if it's what works.

LOL, I thought it was some errant advertising. Thanks!

Thanks. What filter system are you using?

Their claim is they reduce soluble particles to zero. They even include a meter so you will know it's working. http:/www.drkarenslee.com/zero-water-filter-review/ I will check with my chemist friend whom I commute with on the train as well since I'd rather keep things as simple as possible.

I wonder if using a Zero water pitcher is sufficient to remove the harmful contaminants?

Thanks Rodeo Joe & Glen H. I plan on buying another batch of photo chems as I'm now on my 8th roll (2 of the rolls were expired and didn't contain usable images) and the chemicals are said to be useful from 8-12 rolls of film depending on if it's 24 or 36 exposures.

Thanks Rodeo Joe & Glen H. I'll try using distilled water with the stabilizer. I'm planning to buy another batch of development chems anyway so I'll just do it with the next batch and use some calgon in the Wash Water since buying a gallon of distilled water for each time I develop a roll will frankly get old really quick IMHO.

Yes, I'm almost too anal in the way I'm following their directions LOL. I've also just heard from Unicolor and they also say it's probably hard water. That said, our tap water is hard water so I'll by another kit and try using distilled water next time. Definitely am ending the process with the Stabilizer (agitated for 15 sec's, then let sit for 30 sec's. No, I'm not rinsing it afterwards. Thank you both! Hopefully switching to distilled water with the next kit works better. I just hope I don't have to use it for the 3 min wash step as that could end up being a lot water to buy.

Hi all, I recently began shooting film in a couple of rangefinders and as part of that effort I've also decided to try my hand at developing film at home. I've shot a couple of test rolls over the past few weeks but every time I go to develop them I'm getting these weird splotches in my color negatives (scanned w/ an epson v300 flatbed scanner). A bit of background on my process... I'm using Unicolor's C41 developer kit with a Paterson tank system. To keep things at the proper temp, I'm using a heated water bath where I put all the containers of chemistry. I use a timer app on my tablet with a series of timers for each step of the process. Any help / insights on what I might be doing wrong is greatlly appreciated. TIA! Ray

Thanks again Philip! I found this article (Understanding Medium Format Crop Factors) on the different crop factors and the relative bodies and lenses available for each. it's not an exhaustive list of lenses by any stretch but it gives me a good idea of what is available for what and what the 35mm field of view equivalent would be for the various focal length versus format. I'm still in the process of determining what would work best based on my budget. Speaking of which, I did like the Hasselblad V system bodies until I saw the cost of a 30mm lens (>$2K)!! OUCH! But that said, I've also begun shooting 35mm rangefinders (both a Yashica Electro 35 GTN & a Canon QL17 GIII) & developing the results at home. I'd also love to find a local tech who can repair my dad's QL17 (circa 1965 and much earlier than the 1970's era GIII) but that camera is probably not something that will be easy to repair so my best option will probably be to buy a working one in good condition on ebay or a local shop. Yeah, I'm currently using a lower end Epson V300 scanner for the 35mm color negative slides. It does an admirable job but does not support scanning MF film. I'll probably take a close friend up on his offer to help me photograph the slides instead. He built an in-home rig to photograph pictures and negatives using his D800 dslr mounted onto a vertical column. It's much quicker than making a high res scan & the results I've seen are pretty darned good rivaled only by a commercial drum scanner.

Hi Philip, No problem. I was just clarifying as well. I shoot a dslr primarily (Nikon D500 w/ a plethora of lenses LOL) and have only recently started shooting film again. I was influence to do so after getting my dad's Canon QL17 Rangefinder that he purchased back around 1965/66. It was one of his first camera's and a prized possessions. of his. Due to the lack of onsite developing in California stores I've even begun developing the film myself at home using a Paterson tank system. So what's my budget? Realistically since I'm just now testing these waters, as little as possible but that amount is also tempered by ensuring that whatever I get will allow me to grow at this art. So that said, i'm thinking $500-1k for a good but basic system. I've been discussing my intentions with a good friend who is very familiar with the film and shooting options but is not knowledgeable about the gear (he worked at a commercial film developer in the 1990's/2000's and developed everything including 35mm, & especially medium & large format films). He's enlightened me to some of the basics. I've also been trying to review the various MF size formats and found this article (Understanding Medium Format Crop Factors) that compares the different MF formats and the related bodies and brands along with their associated lens options. Based on all of that and my preference to shoot nature landscapes and maybe an occasional (i.e. for fun) portrait, I'm looking for a model with a nice wide angle lens which should be ideal so I'm now considering 645, 6x6, 6x7 formats. I'm still determining which of these will be the most ideal based on a combination of body & wide lens availability, cost, & reliability.

That's what I was thinking. Wanted to be sure I understood it in context. I didn't realize finding someone to perform a quality CLA on a medium format camera was difficult to do these days, but that said it does make some sense.

Unfortunately, that 203FE is well on the high side of of what I want to spend.