fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1 2 3

5 … 7 8 end

Archive 2012 · To film users, a question

andyjaggy82
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #1 · To film users, a question

I can imagine if you didn't have the ability to scan your own film at home then it would be incredibly frustrating, not to mention expensive. If you have a dedicated film scanner it is really quite cheap to have a lab just develop the film, and then scan it yourself. This way you can also just scan the images that look promising.

Jul 31, 2012 at 04:02 PM

philip_pj
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #2 · To film users, a question

Gunzorro, you are dealing with rank amateurs with a poisonous business model.

24Mp scans are absolutely tiny from 67, and MF film is not a process on which you can be half pregnant if a digital workflow is your aim - a personal opinion. It's heresy these days, but a good non-digital printer can turn out great work from 67 negs.

I had to use 3200ppi to try to keep 16 bit RGB files below 350Mb, in my case from a Mamiya 7ii. The Minolta Multi Pro can do 120/220 film at 4800, and the glass holders and a scanhancer maintain the Mamiya's excellent film flatness into the scan. By using such a low resolution (in itself overstated somewhat) 3200ppi is leaving quite a lot on the emulsion. I always felt that, apart from the better drums, 4000ppi was the sweet spot for well-exposed frames.

So it's no surprise you are seeing such a poor result, if you do a back of the envelope calc on the ppi figure that 24Mp actually represents. You should get a 16 bit TIFF or PSD contained in a suitable space if E6, like Joseph Holmes' Chromespace 100 or Ektaspace. You don't want to clip those beautiful film colours.

Almost all MF film pros use(d) a high end 3x-4x loupe on a decent light box.

Find a good lab. A pro lab.

Ken knows his scanners: http://www.kenrockwell.com/minolta/mp.htm

Jul 31, 2012 at 04:51 PM

Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #3 · To film users, a question

philip -- That makes a lot of sense, and is in line with the drum scans clients had done from my film. I've been hoping to do this on the cheap, and avoid expensive lab charges, or poor flatbed scans.

I expect the 6x7 should at least equal, if not exceed, results from a 21MP sensor. The trick is how to do that without becoming the next Peter Figen!

When I send in a few rolls of 35mm and a few 120, the costs mount pretty rapidly, even for the developing plus mid-grade scanning.

Do you have any recommendation for high quality, yet inexpensive, labs? Or how to find them in the US?

andy -- No, I don't have a film scanner at home. Well, I do, but I've found it too obsolete to pursue as a scanning system. I'm not interested in $2k or higher for a 35mm/medium format scanner, although it looks like one is due out in the fall.

Jul 31, 2012 at 05:06 PM

andyjaggy82
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #4 · To film users, a question

I would expect 6X7 to easily beat a 21mp digital capture. The 35mm scans I have done on my Nikon Coolscan were about equivalent to a 12mp image, at least in my opinion. When you look at the film size difference between 35mm and a 6X7 you would expect the 6X7 to blow 21mp out of the water.

Jul 31, 2012 at 06:08 PM

rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #5 · To film users, a question

Gosh, my emotions are all over the place on this. I dont know what to do. Film is so much more complicated than it was back in the day when I just went to my local lab and got awesome prints. The scanning situation needed to get a 6 X 7 negative digitized seem ENORMOUSLY complicated and pricy.

Buying the GF670 is a huge expense for me and I have been mulling it over for close to a damn year now. Back and forth, back and forth. It seems like my mind can change based on whose post I read last.

I do NOT want to buy this camera and end up unhappy. I know that 50% of the equation is OK. I know that I will love the shooting experience. I've owned medium format cameras in the past and the GF670 will be even better since it has a meter. My others needed a hand held meter.

But the output part scares me. Right now I have access to a lab that seems like it would be OK. But I am only living in Shanghai for a short time. What then? I want to buy a scanner and learn scanning. But everywhere I read is, drum scanners are the way to go, but they cost thousands of $$$. I cant go that route. I cant even go beyond a cheap scanner.

Canon has a new scanner, the Canoscan 9000F (or something like that) that has film holders, even for 120 size. It's rated up to 9600 dpi, which to a noob like me, sounds good. But from what I read, this is just nonsense and will leave an enormous amount of quality on the table from my 6 X 7 negatives.

I am so damn confused about all this. I've read literally thousand of posts here, at APUG.org, DPUG.org, and other forums. With most topics, this amount of reading HELPS me, not confuses me. I've got an MS degree in chemistry so I'm not some country bumpkin. But I find this whole topic inscrutable.

Several times I have (or so I thought) closed the door on going back to film. Yet it always comes back. What a nightmare. I seriously think a Nikon D800 might be the best way to go for me. That extra resolution has got to be something that would shut me up.

I've got to end this madness somehow and I dont know how to do that.

Sorry for the rant. Thanks for listening and/or ignoring me. I dont blame you.

Jul 31, 2012 at 09:40 PM

Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #6 · To film users, a question

Great thread with many interesting viewpoints. After more than 30 years with film only, I went 100% digital in 2005. Now I'm back to a mix and shoot film with an F6 and a Fuji GX680 in addition to digital. Film is a great medium and different from digital in so many ways. Enjoying both is like having the cake and eat it too

Rattymouse,
I was saving up for the D800, and obvious move for a Nikon shooter. Then I asked myself: Will that represent a challenge that will make me grow? Will it improve my photography? I found that although it would have made my life easier in many ways, pursuing a greater personal challenge was more to my liking, so I keep my older Nikon cameras (D2Xs and D300) and "invested" in the Fuji instead. Sometimes, when I carry the beast around, I wonder what kind of insane idea that was, but as I learn to use it and the results improve... this is just great!

The scanner "everybody" are waiting for at the moment is the Plustek 120:

http://plustek.com/mea/products/opticfilm-series/opticfilm-120/introduction.html

It will probably be around $2,000, and for those who shoot medium format, Epson 700 and 750 deliver fantastic results at less than half the price.

Jul 31, 2012 at 10:02 PM

rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #7 · To film users, a question

Jorgen Udvang wrote:
Great thread with many interesting viewpoints. After more than 30 years with film only, I went 100% digital in 2005. Now I'm back to a mix and shoot film with an F6 and a Fuji GX680 in addition to digital. Film is a great medium and different from digital in so many ways. Enjoying both is like having the cake and eat it too

Rattymouse,
I was saving up for the D800, and obvious move for a Nikon shooter. Then I asked myself: Will that represent a challenge that will make me grow? Will it improve my photography? I found...Show more →

Wow....carrying around a GX680 is enormous work. You are the man.

I can understand why you declined to go with the D800. I feel somewhat similar to you but at the same time, feel that my images can benefit from improved resolution. My memories of shooting with my old GSW690 were of the prints I got back that were bursting with resolution! Amazing sharpness. With digital, I shoot a Fujifilm S5 Pro. Wonderful camera with amazing color, but not high in resolution. For the most part, I am fine with that, but part of me (sometimes) wants more. Film is one way to get me where I want to be. But I am not sure it is the best way. A Nikon D800 may be the better way. I just dont know.

A $2000 scanner just isn't going to happen with me. Another nail in (potential) coffin in the film direction.

Thanks for your thoughts. I am still amazed that you carry around the GX680. I saw one of these for sale, with THREE lenses in mint condition for $1400. Less than the GF670!!! Incredible

Jul 31, 2012 at 10:16 PM

corposant
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #8 · To film users, a question

A Mamiya 7 with the 80mm lens could be a nice solution for you. It's cheaper used than the GF670 is new, you get a spot meter, AE/AEL, and some of the best lenses ever made for any format.

Jul 31, 2012 at 10:22 PM

rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #9 · To film users, a question

corposant wrote:
A Mamiya 7 with the 80mm lens could be a nice solution for you. It's cheaper used than the GF670 is new, you get a spot meter, AE/AEL, and some of the best lenses ever made for any format.

Yeah, that's slightly cheaper. What's the difference between a Mamiya 7 and 7 II?

Another option is to shoot 35mm film. I lose the resolution battle but get the positive experience out of it. Maybe shoot a Contax G2 system. Or Contax SLR with Zeiss lenses. Lots of used gear in that area here in China.

Damn this is hard.

Jul 31, 2012 at 10:28 PM

corposant
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #10 · To film users, a question

rattymouse wrote:
Yeah, that's slightly cheaper. What's the difference between a Mamiya 7 and 7 II?

Another option is to shoot 35mm film. I lose the resolution battle but get the positive experience out of it. Maybe shoot a Contax G2 system. Or Contax SLR with Zeiss lenses. Lots of used gear in that area here in China.

Damn this is hard.

Don't do it - shoot the biggest format you can carry!

The difference between the two: the 7ii has a polarized VF, the ability to make a double exposure, and a different color options. The other differences are pretty trivial.

Jul 31, 2012 at 10:32 PM

redisburning
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #11 · To film users, a question

you might leave resolution on the film but if you like the results anyway does it matter?

you can certainly get decent results if you shoot negative films. slides are a real challenge, not sure I would go that route.

35mm is fine, LF is for those with immense patience. I think I've lost at least 5 sheets out of my first box by being an idiot in some way. Roll film is a lot easier. MF is a fine proposition and even using something modest like a v500 I think you can get some nice results.

just remember that even though today's scan might not beat a digital camera you always have the option to get a drum scan later. it's not like a digital file where it's as good as it's ever going to get. go watch Harikiri; the movie was made in 1962 but it looks so good because there will always be a lot to extract from the media.

Jul 31, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #12 · To film users, a question

rattymouse -- Since I've assumed the role of Devil's Advocate, I'll continue bit more. . .

I'm a Canon shooter since 1979, but made an expedition into Nikonland briefly around 1990 with FE2 and 28 PC lens, before Canon came out with their 24 TS-E lens. In the last few years, I reentered Nikon territory (dual platform -- keeping all my Canon gear in use) with a D1X, Fuji S5 and D7000, selling it recently to focus on Canon. But I have to say the D800E is a VERY attractive temptation, one that I've been successfully fighting off so far. If I didn't have an affiliation right now, not focused into the field I am, and had the funds, that's the camera I'd buy as the best all-around 35mm-style imaging body. So, I won't hold it against you if you opt for a quality digital body like the D800, D800E, or the 5D3.

That said, and getting back to film. . .

I think the idea of getting your feet wet (again) in 35mm is a good idea if you want to pursue film and scanning. As I've said, the Canon 1N and 1V are economical choices and offer full features for modern shooting. Developing and scanning would be cheaper, and you could find used 35mm scanners. I got my 1N with Power Booster E1 Battery Grip for under $100 (seems sort of like stealing!), and since I had all Canon lenses on hand, it was very cheap to get rolling.

I certainly understand the allure of larger format, having come to 6x7 by way of 4x5. But I don't see how it makes practical or financial sense -- even for me it's more of an emotional response, not something I will make money with or get the fastest results from. I'm not blaming anyone else for trying it and having fun, but for me it's a huge luxury, and at the rate I'm going, I could buy a used 5D2 per year with the film, developing, and scanning costs I'm incurring.

But, if you fall in love with medium format again, the scanner that seems cheapest for decent to high quality is the Epson 700 (not so good for 35mm). I checked into the Canon 9000 and the overall opinions are that it is poor for the purpose of quality film scanning. So, it's the Epson now for under $1000, or the Plustek this fall for around $2000.

Yikes! I'm scaring myself now.

Aug 01, 2012 at 12:21 AM

rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #13 · To film users, a question

Thank you very much for your thoughts. You have given me no answers, but much to think about.

Strange in that the reviews I've seen for the Canoscan scanner seem fairly positive.

Aug 01, 2012 at 01:08 AM

Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #14 · To film users, a question

I was getting ready a few weeks ago to buy the Canon, but discussions here dissuaded me. Then again, how bad can it be for under $200 at B&H, and possibly elsewhere?

Aug 01, 2012 at 01:14 AM

philip_pj
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #15 · To film users, a question

It's heartening to see this level of interest in the 'dead' science of film. 35m has its own appeal and I don't wish to diss that, I recall a fine shooter using it for a coffee table book, he preferred its raw look for some projects; then of course there are those magnificent 35mm lenses from film days, many recycled in our digital systems as alt items.

That being said 120 is every bit as good/better than high end DSLR IMO. Good to hear re the coming scanner, also. It's a craft, is film, beautiful but 'inconvenient'. People have been asserting digital superiority since Michael Reichmann's infamous pronouncement what, 9-10 years ago with the Canon D60 I think. [He's ill at present and best wishes to him.]

The Mamiya 7s are the same effectively. I found either 645 or 6x7 to be excellent, but many love 6x6 and there are Zeiss lenses for them. That GX is an absolutely amazing camera, full marks to users of that one! Many find LF a bridge too far, redisburning, a real purist format, like 8x10. That said, you can use readyloads and field 4x5s weigh very little, and give you enough tilt for say, landscape work. Many users 'retire' with LF, it's very contemplative. Cheap too, apart from film/processing costs, and B&W is easy DIY.

You almost need a close relationship with a good lab, they are around and should be readily available in the US. Here is one:
http://www.westcoastimaging.com/
drum scan pricing:
http://www.westcoastimaging.com/wci/page/services/scan/wciscans.htm (very reasonable)

Here is a good resource, Phil Greenspun's photo.net:

http://photo.net/large-format-photography-forum/
http://photo.net/film-and-processing-forum/

..going strong by the look of it. And a great resource is the large format photography forum:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/

All you ever wanted or needed to know, the volume of information is huge, digital processing included. These forums should help you decide if it for you. And yes, you can pretty much take what Peter F says as gospel.

Good information on the Mamiya 7 in a comparo with the D2X and some nice files:
http://www.diax.nl/pages/start_mamiya_nikon_uk.html

Zeiss (Nasse) had this to say in the MTF paper part 2:

'When you compare the scans from film images with the �original� and with the
previous digital images, you will understand why the 24x36 digital camera
competes with the analog medium format. But you see as well that the quality of larger analog formats is not matched. So there is the need for even better digital cameras.'

Written in the time of the 5Dii/A900/D3X.

Aug 01, 2012 at 01:22 AM

rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #16 · To film users, a question

What does everyone think of this GF670? This ebay seller has these refurbished GF670's all the time at a very nice price. But it says in the text that the serial number has been removed. That is alarming! Are they stolen? Why would anyone remove a serial number?

The seller has 100% positive feedback, including from people who have bought the GF670 from him. With no warranty except from the seller (useless to me, I live in China), is this a bad idea to buy?

Also, why would a camera that is only a few years old need refurbishing?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Fujifilm-GF670-Rangefinder-Folding-Film-Camera-/320954031204?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item4aba59dc64

Aug 01, 2012 at 01:25 AM

edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #17 · To film users, a question

IMHO, I would recommend to shoot 35mm for a while. The quality is very nice at low iso and you can get a dedicated film scanner for 200-300$ (Plustek or Reflecta). During "film days", I used to shoot 35mm, 6x7 and 4x5". That was kind of expected from every self respecting photographer to have the full arsenal, especially that each format had different uses or specialities. So it wouldn't hurt to start with 35mm with a decent film scanner and get later on a 6x7 and keep them both.

Aug 01, 2012 at 02:35 AM

Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #18 · To film users, a question

rattymouse wrote:
What does everyone think of this GF670? This ebay seller has these refurbished GF670's all the time at a very nice price. But it says in the text that the serial number has been removed. That is alarming! Are they stolen? Why would anyone remove a serial number?

The seller has 100% positive feedback, including from people who have bought the GF670 from him. With no warranty except from the seller (useless to me, I live in China), is this a bad idea to buy?

Also, why would a camera that is only a few years old need refurbishing?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Fujifilm-GF670-Rangefinder-Folding-Film-Camera-/320954031204?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item4aba59dc64

That's a very nice price. If I had available money, I would buy one of them myself.

I've seen more or less new cameras being sold as refurbished. It might be any kind of problem that has been overseen during QC, or it's simply a demo model. The advantage with a refurbished camera is that it has usually received full attention before being sold again.

I agree with Edward that shooting 35mm for a while can make sense. You won't get the resolution, but unless you're going to make very large prints, quality of low ISO film is very high these days. They require a better scanner to get the most out of it though. One advantage is that you have access to some very fast lenses, enabling the use of that fine grain film, while few MF lenses are faster than f/2.8. A couple of hundred dollars or less will buy you a body and a very good f/1.4 50mm.

As for carrying the GX680 around, it isn't as bad as it sounds. Camera plus a couple of lenses and two film holders are less than 8 kilograms. I easily get that, plus the eye-level viewfinder and some extras in a Think Tank Airport Addicted which can sit on my back even when riding a motorbike, most of the weight resting on the bike.

It would of course have made more sense to buy a Mamiya 7 for travel, and I might do that in the future, but I never felt 100% comfortable with rangefinder cameras. With the GX680, I also have the advantage of movements, which is great for some forms of photography. Apart from that, it's simply a great feeling using a camera that is as well thought out and solidly built as the Fuji

Aug 01, 2012 at 05:57 AM

rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #19 · To film users, a question

Jorgen Udvang wrote:
That's a very nice price. If I had available money, I would buy one of them myself.

I've seen more or less new cameras being sold as refurbished. It might be any kind of problem that has been overseen during QC, or it's simply a demo model. The advantage with a refurbished camera is that it has usually received full attention before being sold again.

)

Yeah, but this is seller refurbished not a FUJIFILM refurb. That worries me.

Are there any pics on your website from the GX680? I'd love to see some of your work.

Aug 01, 2012 at 06:19 AM

rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #20 · To film users, a question

edwardkaraa wrote:
IMHO, I would recommend to shoot 35mm for a while. The quality is very nice at low iso and you can get a dedicated film scanner for 200-300$ (Plustek or Reflecta). During "film days", I used to shoot 35mm, 6x7 and 4x5". That was kind of expected from every self respecting photographer to have the full arsenal, especially that each format had different uses or specialities. So it wouldn't hurt to start with 35mm with a decent film scanner and get later on a 6x7 and keep them both.

That is a point I need to think hard about. Thanks.

Aug 01, 2012 at 06:19 AM

1 2 3 4 5 … 7 8 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 … 7 8 end