gandicarter

You can't expect to hand-hold a Technikardan, it isn't designed for that. (Which should be obvious) But a Technica uses the same lens boards. One day I plan to buy one!

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

I have a lens for my Technikardan with a Copal 3 shutter - no problems other than it is a

bit tight mounting and dismounting -- which is only a minor problem. (Actually it is the

rear element of the lens that's the tight fit)

I have a tip, I find that the bag bellows works well up to a 150mm lens. I prefer to keep

that bellows on the camera as it is not fussy about alignment when you are setting up or

putting away the camera. The longer "normal" bellows is very flexible but it still can be

damaged when the two standards are close together.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

That camera has excellent compatibility with most manual and auto-focus lenses.

However it is a rather old camera and has some problems with some modern lenses,

specifically:

It does not support VR operation of VR lenses.

The exposure mode of "G" lenses are restricted to "P" and "S" because the F4 was designed

when all lenses had aperture rings to select the aperture and the "G" lenses are designed

for those cameras with separate on-camera controls (sub-command dials) to set the

aperture.

All other Nikon auto-focus 35mm lenses are compatible with the F4.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

P.S. There were some rare autofocus lenses made specifically for the F3AF, which may or

may not work with the F4 -- I sure there's a Nikon site somewhere that can fill in that

information.

I have and use a Linhof Technikardan and a Rolleiflex SL66. Have a look into their features as one might be what you're looking for.

The Rollei only has the one lens movement, but it's the one (lens tilt) that you need 95% (if not more) of the time in landscape photography. It is particularly nice to use with a prism finder. Unfortunately it is no longer in production, but used systems can be put together in a reasonable amount of time.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

You did not say if you have Photomic finders or if you have AS finders.

If your lenses are not AI, AIs or AI converted, you will need to do the conversion for the

D200.

The handling of the D200 is quite a different experience than that of the F2, no surprise

there. Different people react differently to the change, I personally enjoy digital

photography very much and now hardly use any 35mm film. (I use it for a 16mm fisheye-

Nikkor and when using bellows) Once you figure out what all the various features do, you'll

find that you can use the same basic methodology for taking your pictures as with the F2,

you can explore the new technology at your own pace.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

P.S. I prefer the D200 over the D70s, I haven't even tried the D70s with older lenses.

The amount of polarized light varies depending on the situation, consequently you can't

expect a set filter factor. For example, if you are shooting a landscape 90 degrees from

the setting sun, there is a great deal of polarized light and the "filter factor" is nearly 3

stops. Shoot under studio lights and you have a factor close to 2 stops.

The filter you have is of excellent quality, there would be no discernable variation between

samples.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

I do not have that particular lens, but I did move to an HFT 50mm f/4 Distagon on my Rolleiflex and had a noticable improvement in contrast. Not a huge difference, but I thought it was worth the price of the exchange. If I had the option, I would always go for the more modern coating, especially with the wide-angle lenses since I rarely use a shade. (I always use a lens shade with a longer lens)

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

I don't know your shooting style so how can I say what to get?

Myself, I prefer a 4G card (Lexar 80x WA or equivalent). I always use uncompressed RAW and find that anything smaller involves having to swap cards while I'm otherwise busy. One 4G card usually lasts me for one day, although I do carry another card, just in case.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

Three things to consider.

1. Could it be the lab?

It might be - try a roll of transparency (chrome) film and look at the results with a loupe -- that will give you a first-generation result to analyse.

You could try to look at your negatives carefully with a loupe, but I've found it takes a good deal of experience to interpret negatives and see contrast & detail in them.

2. A ISO 400 film isn't going to use the full advantage of your camera and lens. You may want something in the ISO 100 range. That said, it ought to be better than a $300 digital!

3. You didn't mention the size of prints you were using for a comparison. (or even, for that matter, if you were comparing prints to a computer monitor) If the comparison prints are small you won't see much difference -- if they're 16x20 (to exaggerate things a bit) you will see a considerable difference.

If you are comparing prints to a monitor, don't. A monitor has a greater ratio of brightness than a print has. It's the same old projected slide vs. print comparison problem.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

When it works I just ignore it! I can't say how often exactly but it isn't a lot.

The "feeler" is a small diameter steel roller at the top of the magazine that sits just behind

the topmost plastic roller of the insert. If you remove the magazine from the camera and

open the magazine's back then look at the top of the interior with the insert still in place

you can see it. It's the bright steel reflecting the shape of the top roller. Note that the

insert has two rollers at that end.

If you have a bit of manual dexterity you can test if that feeler works. Remove the insert,

push in the cover probe -- it's on the right side about halfway up -- so that the

mechanism "thinks" the back is closed. Start turning the winding knob and (while still

turning) push gently up on that feeler roller (it should move toward you a little bit along

with a black metal reinforcing band just in front of the roller). That should prevent you

from turning the knob, if you can still turn it then it's a job for a good repair shop.

If the mechanism works, you might need to have the position of the insert adjusted, there

are two set screws at the bottom interior of the magazine that contact the insert's bottom

that do this job.

If you determine that you need to count the knob turns (instead of taking the back to a

shop), you will probably have to experiment on your own. From my past (misguided)

Hasselblad days, I seem to remember that there is a marked "start" line on every roll. You

will want to line that start line up with a feature of the insert so that your knob turning

positioning is consistent.

The SL66 is great camera, don't be discouraged by this little problem!

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

The D70 doesn't have an AIs meter coupling -- which is why it's not going to be harmed.

Gerald

There is no problem putting an older Nikkor on your D70, it won't meter but it won't harm

your camera at all. Those are fine lenses, you will not be able to get any better image

quality from any other lenses on your D70.

You might consider getting a hand light meter to help you getting the exposure right more

quickly than your present technique. They can be had inexpensively.

The zoom lenses you mentioned are fine lenses, I particularly think the Nikkor 18-70 is

good value for the money. But realize you are buying convenience, not better image

quality than what you already have. Autofocus, autoexposure, and a zoom range are very

nice to have to simplify the taking of the picture. However when you show a print to

friends though, they see only the quality of the image the lens makes and not the

equipment itself.

One small benefit not mentioned is that a zoom lens reduces the number of times you

swap lenses on the camera which in turn reduces the opportunity for dust to reach the

inside of your camera.

Silent wave is just the motor that focuses the lens, it is usually faster and quieter than the

technology that it replaces but it's nothing that helps a lot -- just a little. The VR

technology helps you acheive a good image when holding the camera by hand -- but a

tripod and cable release is even better.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

I prefer 220 to 120 film. Whether or not it really results in sharper images when using large apertures -- I suspect it does. (The film ought to lay flatter across the gate since there is no backing paper trying to jam its way along the same path as the film) The additional shots per roll is secondary to me, but that's nice too.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

The most likely answer is that you're looking at the D70's image at 100% on your

computer. Did you look at your film images blown up to 30 by 20 inches? A 96ppi

pitched monitor shows images at about that size!

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

I personally would bring my 90mm.

I recommend that you bring a 300mm.

I find that making a satisfactory image with a wide-angle much harder than a longer lens. It's easier to pick and isolate detail than to bring a greater area of landscape in a composition. That's why I give that recommendation -- but I personally feel that well executed wide-angle images more inviting to the viewer. Less "clinical".

Think about what it is you want to acheieve in your photography and see if that guides your decision. If it doesn't, toss a coin!

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

I my particular case I traded in my Hasselblad for a large format monorail (Plaubel Profia) system with number of lenses, bellows, compendium, and aluminum case. Several years after that I wanted to re-explore the outside world again with something better than 35mm. I bought an SL66 and eventually four lenses, a second body, three backs and a prism.

The major difference with the Rollei is having lens tilt that might be limited, but is more than enough for landscapes. The built-in bellows and reversing lenses also help, although I haven't done as much macro photography as I thought I would. Film loading is much less fussy and easier plus the backs support both 120 + 220 rolls. I also very much prefer the instant-return mirror -- I don't know if more modern Hasselblads have adopted that feature.

(Tilting a lens adjusts the plane of focus so that it is no longer parallel to the film plane. This very useful feature, normally associated with view cameras, allows me to put both near and far objects in focus without necessarily having to choose a smaller aperture)

Newer Rolleiflexes offer Schnieder lenses, which might even surpass the excellent Zeiss lenses.

Gerald

( www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

First, get and read the owner's manual!

The shutter is in the lens. There is a "shutter" in the body (not just the mirror) that keeps

the film safe while changing lenses. On my previous Hasselblad (I upgraded to Rolleiflex) I

had to hold the shutter release for the entire duration of the lens' exposure time to

prevent that internal shutter from prematurely closing.

Gerald

Science, technology and art -- that's why!

Science:

The image from most lenses are circular. (Anamorphic lenses, used in the movies, cast an elliptical image) If you wanted to get the most from your lenses with the least amount of imaging material, you would use a round format. Who knows, maybe one day there will be a digital camera with a round sensor!

Technology:

Engineering is always a compromise. Clearly there are issues with creating round film holders or coating round spots of light sensitive chemicals on a strip of film. Rectangular areas are so much more practical.

What rectangular shape maximizes the area of a circle? The square! (As an exercise, provide the mathematical proof, please) So the square format maximizes the image provided by your lens given the practical constraints that a rectangular format be used.

Furthermore, you can also prove that a square format has the least corner fall-off. (Lense images are better in the middle and the quality falls off as one moves further from the centre)

Art:

I'll dare to assert that a photographic artist is involved in all aspects of the techical processes from (even before) the exposure to the final print. The square format, by maximizing the amount of usable image from a given lens, gives the artist the greatest flexibility in choosing the correct crop for the final image.

(Whenever you crop a square format symmetrically, you must leave out the corners of the square -- exactly where the image is at its worst!)

Gerald

P.S. I hardly ever print square! In fact my horizontal prints have been moving to increasing aspect ratios

( www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

Yes you could just crop with bicubic interpolation, sharpen as necessary and print.

However (if you have CS or CS2) you will get slightly better results if you first upsample to 11" x ??" @ 300DPI using "image size" with "bicubic smoother" then crop to 14" size, sharpen, etc.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

In general no.

However the reason why involves many variables.

What white balance?

Was the white balance changed from the camera's original setting?

What was that setting?

What is the (colour of the) subject containing the blown highlight?

What software are you using?

What monitor? Is it calibrated? What is its colour temperture?

My blown highlights tend to be the sky, clouds, the sun, or strong reflections of the sun

off foliage - as I've been mostly shooting plants/landscapes this spring. These highlights

are 254, 254, 254 in the info panel.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

To Asaf and Loren:

1 - The D2x viewfinder is as bright as the F5. I have no trouble focusing manually with

that camera. (And its autofocus system is excellent)

2. - The D2x viewfinder is 100%. I don't have the D2h, but I believe they are identical

modules. (mirror box, prism, etc.)

The D2x viewfinder is smaller than the F5 (I don't have an F100) but not at all bad. The

D1x viewfinder was not 100% and I really do appreciate the difference the D2x viewfinder

makes even though that difference, in area, is small.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

Both "Lens and Shutter" and "Kerrisdale Cameras" are first rate operations with stores in

Victoria and Vancouver. They will sell and process 120 (and 220) film. In Victoria both are

easy to find - "Lens and Shutter" is downtown and "Kerrisdale Cameras" is in the shopping

centre north of Victoria at the end (or the start!) of the Pat Bay Highway that runs from the

city to the ferries.

There are a number of additional stores for the advanced photographer in Vancouver.

Other contributers have mentioned them all except "ABC Photocolour" on 4th Avenue near

Granville Island -- which is a destination you may want to check out!

Much more inportant are the "must visit" places -- unfortunately too many to list, but I'll

give a start:

East Sooke Park - particularly the "Alliard Farm" (sp?) area.

Mill Hill Park

Mt. Douglas Park

The "Galloping Goose" trail (rent some bicycles)

Many beaches on the west coast (Botanical, Sombrio, Point No Point, China, etc.)

Walbran Valley

Carmanah Valley

The Pacific Rim National Park

Cape Scott (if you have the time!)

-- and that's just Vancouver Island!

If you have time for Banff...

First off you MUST get out and hike some trails, there are many worthwhile day hikes.

(if you don't have good boots and other such equipment, get them at "Mountain

Equipment Co-op" in Vancouver on Broadway a couple of blocks east of Cambie.

(They also have a store in Calgary)

Also consider Glacier National Park near Golden, B.C. and Waterton Lakes Park in Alberta.

Finally -- saving the best for last -- take the time to slowly drive that highway between

Banff and Jasper. Try to get a few walks on the trails you find on the way.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

P.S. There are some images on my website of the area.

I have the 2G Lexar and get only 97 images (RAW + smallest JPEG). With that long-lasting battery and my anticipated hiking this year, I'll probably spring for the 4G card. My advice is to start out with the larger card.

The speed of the camera+card (80X) is amazingly fast considering the amount of data involved.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

Don't worry, that's not a typical DSLR, that's a very rugged one. It'll probably last though

several of your family's generations -- if the battery can still be found.

The only possible problem that could affect its lifespan is getting grit into the shutter

mechanism -- a problem with any camera. When I say grit I mean sand from a desert or

beach blown into the camera while changing lenses, something that happens rarely.

You'll enjoy that camera. It has excellent colour, an ultra high shutter speed and flash

sync. speed and one of the best viewfinders in any DSLR. I consider it a "classic", like an

F2 of DSLRs. Many of the images on my wife's and my website are made with a D1x.

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )

Just being a devil's advocate, if the only problem is depth of field, the cheapest solution is a tripod and cable release!

A D2x will give you much more depth of field at an equivalent angle of view. Plus it is very quick in use.

A Rolleiflex SL66 has built-in bellows and lens tilt - slower than the D2x but it doesn't slow you down too much.

Most 4 x 5 cameras will give you the movements you want - but then you really need to cart that tripod along and large format photography is ... contemplative!

Gerald

( http://www.suresoft.ca/homepage/gcarter.html )