Desmolicious wrote:
Yeah, you can even see it on FM B&S. It is a bit strange though how these shops get a sudden influx of gear. camerawest a few weeks ago had a big supply of film Ms, and Nikon film SLRs - things like F100s, FAs, FGs etc. Now it looks like they ave sold all that stuff.
I'm wondering if collectors are unloading? Just strange all of a sudden to see 1980s and 1990s Nikons, as well as a sudden influx of Ms.
Likely big foreign camera sellers dumping inventory with now constant prices. They likely held back while prices continued to go up to avoid flooding the market with too many models at once and instead getting more per model. Now it might make more sense to clear the inventory since prices likely reached its max.
retrofocus wrote:
+1. There is a good reason why Leica rebooted manufacturing of M4 series with the M4-2 after the M5 remained below sales expectations. I never owned a M5, but a photo buddy of mine has one which I looked at. One thing I like is the metering display in the viewfinder, but agree, the body is too bulky compared to the rest of the series. The in-camera metering arm is another hardware thing which can break easily and is no longer replaceable.
Much like the arrival of the MP when they ended M6 TTL production. The Millennium and several other special editions showed there was both a market and demand for a modern retro styled camera. Leica went the traditionalist route and left the M7 drifting with only minor improvements.
madNbad wrote:
The M5, M6 TTL and the M7 were designed to be used while looking through the viewfinder. It’s unfortunate that it wasn’t until years after the M5 ended production, its features were appreciated.
Yah. I have the M6 (neue), MP and M7. And as much as traditionalists claim it is the correct thing to have the small shutter speed dial that turns the wrong way vis a vis the exposure arrows, Leica knew as much when they introduced the M6TTL and then the M7. Bigger, easier to turn dial. H3ck they knew that when they introduced the M5!
But then they gone and introduced the MP... which went back in time with the shutter speed dial and the rewind knob...
I don't really care one way or the other about the rewind knob, but the shutter speed dial is a bummer. Whenever I use the MP or M6 I have to consciously remember to turn the dial the opposite direction of the arrows.
Desmolicious wrote:
Yah. I have the M6 (neue), MP and M7. And as much as traditionalists claim it is the correct thing to have the small shutter speed dial that turns the wrong way vis a vis the exposure arrows, Leica knew as much when they introduced the M6TTL and then the M7. Bigger, easier to turn dial. H3ck they knew that when they introduced the M5!
But then they gone and introduced the MP... which went back in time with the shutter speed dial and the rewind knob...
I don't really care one way or the other about the rewind knob, but the shutter speed dial is a bummer. Whenever I use the MP or M6 I have to consciously remember to turn the dial the opposite direction of the arrows....Show more →
I feel the same way, however my first Leica was a M6 classic, so the opposite is weird to me. I am certainly not a 'traditionalist', and get the reasoning behind the change.
There are two things with Leica rangefinder cameras which I haven't managed to get used to even after 8 years of usage: a) different rotation of the shutter speed dial (one supposedly better fitting the rotation of the lens aperture ring which I can never remember the direction anyway by not looking at it), and b) the focus tab on some M/LTM lenses. One great solution I saw with some TTArtisan lenses where the tab is included in the package, but the user can decide to glue it onto the focus ring or leave it.
Since this has turned into the defacto film forum, I'd like to ask for some scanning advice:
My lab charges $5 CAD per roll for scans, so it would take quite a few rolls of film to make a scanner worthwhile for me economically. On the other hand, sometimes I'm not happy with their scans, especially when their Noritsu is having problems and they use their Fuji scanner (I dislike those cold greenish Fuji colors). So now my debate is between a dedicated scanner such as Plustek or a camera-scanning setup.
I don't own any macro lens, so the total cost would be similar between the two options; the main limitation with a Plustek is that it only scans 35mm film and if I ever decide to get a medium-format film camera I'd have to invest in one of their 120 film scanners or switch to camera scanning. With camera scanning my main limitation is that I don't use Photoshop or Lightroom, so I don't have access to Negative Lab Pro; I could use Darktable I suppose, but there's usually a big learning curve with anything I try to do in Darktable.
I'm having trouble deciding which path to pursue; the Plustek seems like the simplest choice for me and I can just forget about my medium-format dreams. I don't think I'd have any use for a macro lens apart from scanning.
I'd love to get opinions on this, especially in terms of image quality and flexibility in post.
bjhurley wrote:
Since this has turned into the defacto film forum, I'd like to ask for some scanning advice:
My lab charges $5 CAD per roll for scans, so it would take quite a few rolls of film to make a scanner worthwhile for me economically. On the other hand, sometimes I'm not happy with their scans, especially when their Noritsu is having problems and they use their Fuji scanner (I dislike those cold greenish Fuji colors). So now my debate is between a dedicated scanner such as Plustek or a camera-scanning setup.
I don't own any macro lens, so the total cost would be similar between the two options; the main limitation with a Plustek is that it only scans 35mm film and if I ever decide to get a medium-format film camera I'd have to invest in one of their 120 film scanners or switch to camera scanning. With camera scanning my main limitation is that I don't use Photoshop or Lightroom, so I don't have access to Negative Lab Pro; I could use Darktable I suppose, but there's usually a big learning curve with anything I try to do in Darktable.
I'm having trouble deciding which path to pursue; the Plustek seems like the simplest choice for me and I can just forget about my medium-format dreams. I don't think I'd have any use for a macro lens apart from scanning.
I'd love to get opinions on this, especially in terms of image quality and flexibility in post....Show more →
I used a Plustek 7600i for a number of years and it's a fine scanner. The later editions are basically the same with improved software. Sliverfast comes bundled with the Plustek and offers a lot of customizable settings but it does take some time to learn. The downside to the Plustek is it's slow. If you don't mind spending an afternoon scanning a roll, it's a great way to go. They don't take up much desk space and having a few extra holders around helps speed up the process.
Currently, I use a Sony A7II with a FE90 2.8 Macro. I'm also using a Negative Supply Pro Carrier 135, their 5X7 light source and copystand. The products are expensive but built to last and it has taken me a few years to assemble. I don't have Lightroom but use RAW Power by Gentlemen Coders mostly as a plug in for Apple Photos.
I started with a battered Sony A5100 and a 55 Micro-Nikkor 2.8 Ai-S and have added or completely changed things over the years. Other members use the Nikon ES-6 with a 60 Micro Nikkor.
If medium format is your primary format, a bed scanner would be the best choice. Keep asking questions, we all learn from it!
I will add, I only use 135 B&W film. If I did a lot of color, I would spend the money for a Lightroom subscription and NLP.
Portland used to have some great color labs but now it's mostly just Citizens Photo or Pro Photo Supply.
madNbad wrote:
[ I don't have Lightroom but use RAW Power by Gentlemen Coders mostly as a plug in for Apple Photos.
Cool, thanks I'll have to look into that! I use Capture One, but it doesn't have (as far as I know) any support for converting negatives other than the standard stuff like flipping the curve.
I've been looking into the Valoi scanning kits, which look nice if I decide to go the macro lens route. I have a Sony A7iii and a Nikon F/G adapter so I could also get a Nikon macro lens and use the scanning attachment for that; lots of options to consider.
bjhurley wrote:
Cool, thanks I'll have to look into that! I use Capture One, but it doesn't have (as far as I know) any support for converting negatives other than the standard stuff like flipping the curve.
I've been looking into the Valoi scanning kits, which look nice if I decide to go the macro lens route. I have a Sony A7iii and a Nikon F/G adapter so I could also get a Nikon macro lens and use the scanning attachment for that; lots of options to consider.
Huss posted on how he uses the ES-6, it's worth a look. I came across a "bargain" priced FE90 and after years of manual focus, it made scanning so much easier. Since you already have the A7III, it would be the way to go for 135.
You don’t even need a macro lens if you have a 50. Just get a couple of extension tubes to turn it into a macro.
With NLP and my digicam I can scan and convert a 36 exp roll in about 30mins at max rez. Note I said and convert. From what I have seen desktop scanners literally take hours at max rez.
I have been having the same debate with myself on how to scan. I currently am using the Valoi Easy35 with my Laowa 90 macro on my Sony A1. I was thinking about the plustek but saw reports that they don't necessarily work well with Apple silicon. Would like another solution for scanning 120 and thought about Negative Lab Pro but at the time, I wasn't sure I wanted to make that investment. The valoi Easy35 is relatively inexpensive, quick and easy and satisfies 80% of my film scanning needs. For now, I'll let the lab scan my 120 film.
rji2goleez wrote:
I have been having the same debate with myself on how to scan. .
The thing is, I'm happy with my lab's scans 90 percent of the time; it's just a few individual images that I would like to rescan and maybe it just makes sense to bring those negs to another lab (we have one with a drum scanner here in town).
If I start developing my own B&W film next year then I'll need to do my own unless I bring in my film to be scanned.
bjhurley wrote:
The thing is, I'm happy with my lab's scans 90 percent of the time; it's just a few individual images that I would like to rescan and maybe it just makes sense to bring those negs to another lab (we have one with a drum scanner here in town).
If I start developing my own B&W film next year then I'll need to do my own unless I bring in my film to be scanned.
After I got the Valoi Easy35, I had my lab develop and scan. Once I got the negatives, I was able to scan and compare with the lab. They are pretty close but the file dimensions of my scans with the Sony A1 far exceeds what my local lab is providing.
rji2goleez wrote:
After I got the Valoi Easy35, I had my lab develop and scan. Once I got the negatives, I was able to scan and compare with the lab. They are pretty close but the file dimensions of my scans with the Sony A1 far exceeds what my local lab is providing.
I could get high-res scans from my lab but they are pricey. I wouldn't mind being able to control the crop myself, though, which is another appeal of scanning my own. At this point I'm treating the lab scans as if they were contact sheets and from there I can pick the few images that I might want to have rescanned or even printed. Given that I'm likely to slow down on shooting film once I settle on the emulsions I like best and spend less time experimenting, this might even be a sustainable solution for me. And the longer I wait, the more and better scanning options are likely to appear on the market.
After years of avoiding it, I'm leaning towards getting a Lightroom subscription and Negative Lab Pro. My current set up works well but having spent the money for the hardware, it's time to step up to some better software.
madNbad wrote:
After years of avoiding it, I'm leaning towards getting a Lightroom subscription and Negative Lab Pro. My current set up works well but having spent the money for the hardware, it's time to step up to some better software.
Yeah, the subscription model kinda blows in many/most ways. But the upside is it is continually updated. And we pay for subscriptions everywhere else too - streaming services, phone plans etc.
Unless we work primarily in darkrooms, we need software. And this is how it is now offered up.
madNbad wrote:
After years of avoiding it, I'm leaning towards getting a Lightroom subscription and Negative Lab Pro. My current set up works well but having spent the money for the hardware, it's time to step up to some better software.
I used Lightroom for years and loved it, but I have had so many bad experiences with Adobe as a company that I just don't want to give them any more of my money. It has nothing to do with subscriptions (I subscribe to lots of software). Even a few weeks ago I had a terrible experience with them; I had an emergency one morning at work where I needed some features in Acrobat Pro and I only had Acrobat Standard on my work computer, and my boss is in a different time zone so I couldn't get the purchase approved in time for the deadline. So I bought it myself with my own money and installed it on my personal computer. What should have been a 10-15 minute operation stretched on for nearly two hours. After I bought the software the email they sent with a download link led to a 404 error and it took a lot of workarounds for me to finally download and install the software, which took forever to install and authenticate.
I really like Adobe's software but in more than 30 years of using their products I have never once had a good customer experience.
