fredmiranda.com
Login

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       4              6       7       8       end
  

Archive 2012 · To film users, a question

  
 
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #1 · To film users, a question


Jorgen Udvang wrote:
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


The Fuji is a superb camera. I have never used it myself but was very keen on getting one when they were first introduced in the early 90s. I used to go and play with it almost daily at the local dealer

However, I really admire you for carrying all this weight. Eight kilos was like my entire Sony system, including A900 and 8-9 lenses!!!!! As for the Mamiya 7 it is indeed very attractive. It has the finest lenses ever designed for medium format. And RF isn't bad as long as you accept that the framing is not 100% accurate and be willing to slightly crop off the unwanted details. What I don't like about it is the cheap build quality ( you have to treat it gently) and the slow lenses and long MFD. I am considering to buy one of them but not before the Plustek 120 scanner is out and proven to be as good as claimed.



Aug 01, 2012 at 06:29 AM
Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #2 · To film users, a question


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


Ah... I didn't see that. On the other hand, the seller seems to be into parts and repairs and has 100% feedback. I don't know...

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



Not yet. I received the first parts of the system a couple of months ago and the rest only two weeks ago, so I'm still practicing. I'll post some photos as soon as I feel that I'm on safe ground.

There's another photographer, Fred Greissing, who has some excellent portrait work done with the GX680. He posted some samples on this thread:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/34529-any-fuji-gx680-shooters-mfdb.html

and here:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/37346-medium-format-right-me.html

If you google him, a whole lot of celebrity portraits pop up.

Edit:
Forget the other links. Here is his gallery at ModelMayhem. Not all is GX680 and not all is film, but a lot of it is.

http://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/1420040/viewall

And here's a video that shows the camera in use:



Edited on Aug 01, 2012 at 07:01 AM · View previous versions



Aug 01, 2012 at 06:40 AM
Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #3 · To film users, a question


Edward,
I assume you know that Niks Thailand has the 7 II in stock for around 65,000 baht including the standard lens.



Aug 01, 2012 at 06:55 AM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #4 · To film users, a question


Jorgen Udvang wrote:
Edward,
I assume you know that Niks Thailand has the 7 II in stock for around 65,000 baht including the standard lens.


I had no idea, Jorgen! Thanks a lot for the tip. At this price I can buy it and sell it for a profit if I don't like it

As soon as I'm back to Bangkok (currently on holidays overseas) I will pay Niks a visit.



Aug 01, 2012 at 07:09 AM
campyone
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #5 · To film users, a question


I used film cameras (medium and large format) for about 15 years (once I became serious about photography I forgot about 35mm). I processed and printed in my home darkroom for about 10 of those years, then started learning how to scan and print digitally for the last 5 or so of those years.

There's no comparison between what can be done to make a fine print digitally using Photoshop and what can be done in a darkroom, Photoshop just gives you infinitely more control, the ability to make exactly the print you want to make, than you can get with the comparatively crude and limited tools available in a darkroom. About the only way to even come close in a darkroom is with masking and that's a very time consuming, PITA process, and even it isn't as good as Photoshop. So I scanned film in order to be able to print digitally.

I later switched to digital entirely, haven't used a film camera in years and would never go back to one for the landscape and architectural photography I do except possibly to an 8x10 camera for contact printing just for fun. But the OP's question related to scanning vs printing in a darkroom so I won't go into the issue of film vs digital cameras except to say that anyone who thinks there's some inherent special "look" to a print made from film is deluding themselves. I'll also mention that you haven't seen a large digital file until you've scanned an 8x10 negative. : - )








Aug 01, 2012 at 07:17 AM
Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #6 · To film users, a question


edwardkaraa wrote:
I had no idea, Jorgen! Thanks a lot for the tip. At this price I can buy it and sell it for a profit if I don't like it

As soon as I'm back to Bangkok (currently on holidays overseas) I will pay Niks a visit.


That's the price they gave me when I asked a couple of months ago. Hope they still have it, but I assume they are rather eager to move some stock after they lost the Nikon distribution.



Aug 01, 2012 at 07:33 AM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #7 · To film users, a question


Jorgen Udvang wrote:
That's the price they gave me when I asked a couple of months ago. Hope they still have it, but I assume they are rather eager to move some stock after they lost the Nikon distribution.



Thank you Jorgen! I will bargain the hell out of them. I'm sure buyers are not queuing up to get one



Aug 01, 2012 at 09:54 AM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #8 · To film users, a question


campyone wrote:
I used film cameras (medium and large format) for about 15 years (once I became serious about photography I forgot about 35mm). I processed and printed in my home darkroom for about 10 of those years, then started learning how to scan and print digitally for the last 5 or so of those years.

There's no comparison between what can be done to make a fine print digitally using Photoshop and what can be done in a darkroom, Photoshop just gives you infinitely more control, the ability to make exactly the print you want to make, than you can get with
...Show more

What took you so long campyone? I was very surprised, almost shocked, that until the 5th page, no smart ass has chimed in with some of the genius remarks like the ones in your post above

Sometimes I don't understand human nature. The op says clearly "to film users, a question" and still someone feels the urge to come and say I used film for 15 years, film sucks, digital is better, film has no specific look, and other idiotic stuff like that. WTF!



Aug 01, 2012 at 09:57 AM
redisburning
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #9 · To film users, a question


campyone wrote:
I used film cameras (medium and large format) for about 15 years (once I became serious about photography I forgot about 35mm).


well, I guess that means all of my favorite photographers aren't serious, especially Moriyama since he used the dreaded half frame sometimes.

I mean, I have a 4x5 that I use to take pictures of my pets and crap around my house. it's good to know I'm like 100 million times more serious about photography than say Ralph Gibson cuz dude uses 35mm.

Also, I'm pretty sure my d*** is a lot bigger, too. 35mm, where do these people get off?



Aug 01, 2012 at 10:15 AM
Dustin Gent
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #10 · To film users, a question


That is hilarious, HILARIOUS i tell you - that someone wouldn't take photography serious until they used digital; but alas, that is a personal opinion/choice. Perhaps you didn't give film a chance?

Me personally, I sold off my digital stuff to move to film. A move to help improve my skills and grow as a photographer. I have no "crutches" to fall back on, such as LCD, histogram, live view, etc. I would like to think I am an ok photographer, and getting the results I am from film (and the first rolls and an old $100 lens mind you) thus far, i am super pleased.

Oh and the film scans do have a different look than digital, for sure. That in turn will show up in print. you can click on my www below to see my work.. I will be adding film shots soon to the page..

carry on



Aug 01, 2012 at 11:18 AM
rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #11 · To film users, a question


edwardkaraa wrote:
What took you so long campyone? I was very surprised, almost shocked, that until the 5th page, no smart ass has chimed in with some of the genius remarks like the ones in your post above

Sometimes I don't understand human nature. The op says clearly "to film users, a question" and still someone feels the urge to come and say I used film for 15 years, film sucks, digital is better, film has no specific look, and other idiotic stuff like that. WTF!


No worries Edward. A post like that one is clearly seen for what it is and will not spoil one of THE most productive discussions I have had anywhere in a long time.





Aug 01, 2012 at 07:30 PM
rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #12 · 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




Anyone else, comments on this camera for sale?



Aug 01, 2012 at 07:30 PM
rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #13 · To film users, a question



I was reading up on the GX680 last night. That really looks like an incredible camera and the prices for the gear are simply amazing. Those lenses used to be ghastly expensive as well as the camera, and now they are virtually free for the taking!! Very very tempting, but probably the worst move I could make for me personally.




Aug 01, 2012 at 07:32 PM
mawz
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #14 · To film users, a question


campyone wrote:
I later switched to digital entirely, haven't used a film camera in years and would never go back to one for the landscape and architectural photography I do except possibly to an 8x10 camera for contact printing just for fun. But the OP's question related to scanning vs printing in a darkroom so I won't go into the issue of film vs digital cameras except to say that anyone who thinks there's some inherent special "look" to a print made from film is deluding themselves. I'll also mention that you haven't seen a large digital file until you've scanned an
...Show more

The point isn't that there is some 'look' to film that can't be duplicated with digital. The point is that you can't easily duplicate it with digital. Film's inherent non-linearities (both in response curve and in the grain distribution) gives a result that is difficult (but possible) to duplicate in post, particularly with Slide films or classic-grain B&W. Conversely there are certain films which are very simple to duplicate in post, most notably the TMax films.



Aug 01, 2012 at 08:16 PM
mawz
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #15 · To film users, a question


redisburning wrote:
well, I guess that means all of my favorite photographers aren't serious, especially Moriyama since he used the dreaded half frame sometimes.

I mean, I have a 4x5 that I use to take pictures of my pets and crap around my house. it's good to know I'm like 100 million times more serious about photography than say Ralph Gibson cuz dude uses 35mm.

Also, I'm pretty sure my d*** is a lot bigger, too. 35mm, where do these people get off?


Umm, I'm pretty sure you misread campyone here. He, like many others, went to larger formats when they started to shoot seriously. Given that he explicitly stated he shot landscape and architecture, this is understandable for a multitude of reasons, most notably movements. He did not say that 35mm was unserious but rather that he left it behind when he became serious.



Aug 01, 2012 at 08:18 PM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #16 · To film users, a question


rattymouse wrote:
I was reading up on the GX680 last night. That really looks like an incredible camera and the prices for the gear are simply amazing. Those lenses used to be ghastly expensive as well as the camera, and now they are virtually free for the taking!! Very very tempting, but probably the worst move I could make for me personally.



I agree about the worst move part. This camera is a monster, even bigger than a Mamiya RB/RZ. It does have some incredible features, but it's a studio only camera. It requires a very sturdy tripod for outdoors use too. Not for everyone.



Aug 01, 2012 at 08:27 PM
Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #17 · To film users, a question


edwardkaraa wrote:
I agree about the worst move part. This camera is a monster, even bigger than a Mamiya RB/RZ. It does have some incredible features, but it's a studio only camera. It requires a very sturdy tripod for outdoors use too. Not for everyone.


It's absolutely not for anyone, I have to agree to that, and it took me 10 years of consideration to finally throw in the towel and buy one (two actually, since I I've bought both the standard model III and the IIIs without movements for easier travel... it's "only" 2,350g vs. 2,690g of the standard body, but it's also easier to fit in a camera bag). A tripod with head for outdoor use is a headache as well. There's no way around a strong carbon fiber tripod, and the ideal travel head, the Arca-Swiss D4, costs over $1,000. Studio use is easier, since any cheap, heavyweight tripod will do, as will my old Manfrotto 3-way head.

There's also the consideration of viewfinders. There are several different available, but the "best" one, the eye-level AE viewfinder, is as common as hen's teeth and priced correspondingly. By some weird coincidence, I ended up with two of those (I didn't realise that one was included in a complete set I'd ordered and bought one from another source for $1,200). Want a neck strap? I recently lost an auction at the great big auction site because my maximum bid was "only" $350.

When all that is said, for some kinds of photography, like food and product shots, the camera simply has no equal. It has the advantages of a large format camera with all the movements and the operational ease of an SLR merged into one unit. A basic kit, even with the best of the lenses (they are all very, very good) is still very cheap, and a set with body, three lenses and a couple of film holders is easily obtainable for less than $1,500.

I'm hopefully into this long term, and I even consider digital back options. The Sinar backs seem to be the easiest solution for this camera, but current Sinar backs are for tethered shooting only, so not something for easy travel photography unless somebody can dig up a FW to WiFi solution with integrated power supply. The alternative is a Sinar Emotion, which isn't too badly priced second hand, and which could also be fitted to a more portable MF camera like the Hy6 or a Rollei. But now we're talking next year and beyond in my case...



Aug 01, 2012 at 09:48 PM
redisburning
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #18 · To film users, a question


mawz wrote:
Umm, I'm pretty sure you misread campyone here. He, like many others, went to larger formats when they started to shoot seriously. Given that he explicitly stated he shot landscape and architecture, this is understandable for a multitude of reasons, most notably movements. He did not say that 35mm was unserious but rather that he left it behind when he became serious.


if you say so.

what I'm saying is that there are a lot of seriously talented people doing serious photography on 35mm, plus they actually make some of their pictures available to view.

dude's a troll, plain and simple.



Aug 01, 2012 at 09:49 PM
rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #19 · To film users, a question


Jorgen Udvang wrote:
A basic kit, even with the best of the lenses (they are all very, very good) is still very cheap, and a set with body, three lenses and a couple of film holders is easily obtainable for less than $1,500.

.



It's this pricing that is simply amazing. The GF670 camera I am agonizing over is $1700!! For a tiny folding camera. What you can buy with $1500 going after the GX680 is unreal. Of course, lots of extras are needed such as the tripod you mentioned, but still, there cant be too many better deals in all of photography that the GX680.




Aug 01, 2012 at 09:55 PM
rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #20 · To film users, a question


A question I forgot to ask...How do you find the GX680 IIIs? Is it substantially easier to travel with? If you are not interested in movements, this camera seems like the way to go.






Aug 01, 2012 at 09:56 PM
1       2       3       4              6       7       8       end




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

1       2       3       4              6       7       8       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account