|
The big thing is that the v800 can scan 4x5. With the 600 you have to stitch. And the film holders hold a lot more. Iirc the v800 comes with silverfast which is the best scanning software ever made.
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:36 |
|
|
I somehow just noticed that freestyle carries Velvia 100 in addition to Velvia 50. I don't know why, but I thought 50 was the only version available anymore. Any opinions on how they compare to one another? I've messed around with the slower version. It's very punchy and saturated. I seem to remember hearing that Velvia 100 is supposed to be more naturalistic, but still vividly colorful compared to Provia. It's that a realistic assessment? Wild EEPROM posted:The big thing is that the v800 can scan 4x5. With the 600 you have to stitch. For roll film, is there a qualitative difference between the V800's output and the 550/600, if they're all using the same software? Just curious. I'm fine with the output from a V550, but it's not as good as whatever my local lab has.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
yes, that's the dmax for you. V800 dmax is 4, and the v550/600 claims 3.4. Optical quality on the V800 is better as well, and has a higher actual DPI. Basically the only reason to buy the v550/600 over the v800 is money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:For roll film, is there a qualitative difference between the V800's output and the 550/600, if they're all using the same software? Just curious. I'm fine with the output from a V550, but it's not as good as whatever my local lab has. Maybe your local lab is using a Noritsu or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 08:55
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Maybe your local lab is using a Noritsu or something. I find that while the internet seems to have this weird hard-on for them, they're not that good a scanner. I've talked to lab techs and they've showed me theirs and walked me through it. It seems mainly optimized for speed. It also crops a lot, especially for 35mm film since detecting the frame edges is not very reliable. Because no one wants irregular black borders around their pictures, it hacks off a decent chunk of the original negative. DMax wise I've found the Noritsu to be marginally better than a V600 in some cases, but any decent dedicated scanner will beat the pants off it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
The 'Noritsu Kouki EZ Controller' that shows up in the metadata of the scans I get from my local Walgreens (last one within 100 miles that still does 1-hour in-house developing... And they'll put an end to that in October) can't be very good, because the image quality is always pretty poo poo. I've seen other images on Flickr tagged with Noritsu that looked great, though, so I assumed there were different models.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
My Noritsu lab scans were sharp but the colors were hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
This is a simple concept, but someone give me a sanity check here. Trying to rehab a thrift shop OM-1n. 1) A scene, focused with the VF on a number on a ruler, appears to be focused ~0.5" farther out in the developed image. The lens moves as a block in the helical. It moves farther from the film to focus closer, and closer to focus farther away. Therefore the focusing screen is *too close* to the mirror. If the screen was farther above the mirror, it would show the point of focus 'farther out' - i.e. closer to what is really is at the film plane. Y/N 2) Changing the angle of the reflex mirror by adjusting the position of the support tab that the bottom of the mirror sits on can change the point of focus in the viewfinder and might be able to correct the VF/film plane focus incongruity. Y/N Edited for clarity. It's still an obtuse description, but I hope it's mostly sensible. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
i think i follow you: • The focus is off on your camera because what you focused through the viewfinder doesn't match with what the shot turned out. • You therefore determine that the cause of this is that the mirror isn't sitting in the camera right, it might be too close to the prism? Have you tried another lens with the camera? It sounds like you'd be right with the camera, but would you really need to do the work? I think it's too much physics for me, but I'd doubt it would have an effect like that. unless the camera looks like it's been disturbed in there. My mind is telling me that the mirror won't exactly change the length of the area the light has to cross before hitting the focusing screen. Of course I don't actually know too much about the OM-1, except basics on SLRs and how some cameras have the mirror travel up and pivot. does this camera just swing it up, or does it have to travel up a tiny bit first? The Modern Sky fucked around with this message at 03:48 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:This is a simple concept, but someone give me a sanity check here. Trying to rehab a thrift shop OM-1n. Yes. Generally speaking a lens will be focused at infinity when it is closest to the sensor plane and get closer as you move the lens further out. This is how extension tubes work. SMERSH Mouth posted:
Not really. You'll move part of the image, but part of the mirror will stay at the same distance. Do this if the focal plane in the viewfinder seems 'off vertical'. You might need to shim the focusing screen a bit higher, or maybe see if something has the entire mirror sitting too high as a unit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
I just found a really good discount on (some) film, good through the 20th. eBay is running a 20%-off summer promotional event with some of their sellers. The PSUMMER20 coupon code is good for up to $50 off ($250 total purchase) from a small list of mostly uninteresting vendors. BUT, as it turns out, one of the sellers is Ritz Camera, which... you know, not the greatest store, but not (usually) a complete shitshow either. They sell (some) film through their eBay store. Shipping is free. It turns out that their Kodak pricing is a tick higher than most of the big vendors, but low enough that you usually 10-15% off with the coupon. Their pricing on Fuji is sometimes-OK, and their Ilford prices are unfortunately "beyond stupid", so no go there. Here are some of the better deals: pre:1 - All their 50-sheet boxes of 4x5 really good for Kodak pricing, which is to say "still a bit more expensive than Ilford, but at least not ridiculously so":
a - Tri-X 320: $110 - 20% = $88, price elsewhere $115
b - TMax 100: $100 - 20% = $80, price elsewhere $105+
c - TMax 400: $128 - 20% = $102.40, price elsewhere $128
2 - Portra pricing is very solid:
a - Portra 400 35mm 5-pack, $40 - 20% = $32, price elsewhere $38+ (Amazon price is $48, come on guys).
b - Portra 400 120 5-pack, $33 - 20% = $26.40, price elsewhere $30
3 - There's one good Fuji deal, but everything else is just saving 2-3%: Fuji Velvia 100 120 5-pack, $43 - 20% = $34.40, price elsewhere $41
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Understanding posted:i think i follow you: It's weird. I'm 2 for 2 with OM-1n's with bad focus. The tried and true tripod + ruler method returns OOF tick marks that were perfectly matched with the split image. Multiple frames, multiple lenses, all OOF. An OM-2S and FM tested in the same manner showed true focus in the VF, confirmed with film. Further support for my two potential explanatory theories. Either a) Half time time someone sells a film camera on the second-hand market, it's because there's something really wrong with it; or b) I'm cursed by the camera gods.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
This sounds like a problem with Oly SLRs, have you spoken with any pro about this? http://olympus.dementix.org/Hardware/PDFs/OM-1_1of4.pdf there are also service manuals out there. The Modern Sky fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 14:44
|
|
|
The OM-1 service manual has a provision for adjusting 'focus' (really flange distance) by changing the thickness of washers behind the mount, but I can't see how that would help focus inaccuracy in the viewfinder, just the focusing scale on the lens. My quick and dirty solution? Bending that drat mirror support pin. Couldn't have done it if I didn't already have an OM with known good focus accuracy and two 50/1.8s, but with some careful setup and trial & error (including burning through three rolls of film..), the focus is now accurate. I wonder if some adjustment of the pin angle is done during original assembly of the camera. They aren't all pointing the same way in each camera, from what I've seen. Not an advisable thing to go loving around with, but with some luck I was able to make it work.* Framing and focus on the matte screen towards the upper and lower edges of the viewfinder are fine too, somehow. *Pin may have been weakened by my manhandling, and a few hundred more mirror actuations may cause it to bend back out of spec, or break. This is not a solution I recommend. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Jun 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
Had time last week to put the Yashica Mat back together. Shutter and self-timer work fine now and cleaned up the mirror and focusing screen. A previous owner had definitely been a smoker. Flocked the interior with telescope flocking as well. The winding lever sticks when winding on to the next frame occasionally but that's fixable by just hitting on the shutter release again. Doesn't expose a frame since the shutter hasn't been cocked. Not going to worry about it unless it jams for good. I know what's causing it but I'd rather avoid dismantling the side full of bits that can go sproing! all over my living room. I will never buy a camera off E-Bay again. Shot a roll of cheap color negative (Lomo 400) at random junk to try it out.  It flares with even the slightest bit of bright light in the scene; even with a flocked light box and lens hood. I don't have a proper Yashica lens hood some I'm using a Bayonet to 49mm filter adapter to fit a hood. I used a "Leica" style hood since they're shorter than the cup types that I have and I wasn't sure how far out I could stick the hood before vignetting became an issue. I'll use a deeper hood next time. I'm not used to handling it either so lots of shots are ever so slightly blurry from jerking it while hitting the shutter release. There's a decorative collar around the shutter button that you remove to attach a cable release with a "Leica Nipple". Found that just leaving that collar off makes pressing the shutter button way easier and smoother and had no issue with fat fingering it after that. Now to start killing all this FP4 and HP5 I suddenly have in the fridge. Wonder how all that got in there? Sauer fucked around with this message at 08:47 on Jun 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 06:41
|
|
|
Moskva 6x9 shots on Fomapan 100. Wehraboos.  Moskva_Airshow004.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr Tankies  Moskva_Airshow003.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr MiG  Moskva_Airshow007.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr Hind  Moskva_Airshow006.jpg by Iain Compton, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 06:41
|
|
|
For the Canucks there's a newish store called Buy Film Canada run by a guy out of his home. His prices are pretty much what it costs to get from the USA after exchange rate but shipping expense and time is less. Might be worthwhile for Americans as well if exchange rate works but shipping costs from Canada to anywhere else are kind of insane. He currently stocks 35mm and 120 and not necessarily the same offerings in each format (No Foma in 120 yet  ). He also has C-41 kits.
Sauer fucked around with this message at 09:03 on Jun 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 08:59
|
|
|
Just buy Foma direct from Europe, you'll struggle to get a better price anywhere else https://www.fomafoto.com/index.php/shop/b-w-film/foma-films
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 10:14
|
|
|
Is Dwayne's the cheapest place to get slide film processed in the US if I don't care about getting scans? $9/roll seems ok. I recently had a couple rolls done by thedarkroom.com, but at $14/roll it adds up pretty quick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
http://www.citizensphoto.com/processing 8.50/roll
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Thanks   [ 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
Is a zorki 4 with (i think) a jupiter 50 f2 worth $50 CAD? Might be able to snag one tonight. Anything in particular I should inspect? rip sovcam thread 
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Check the cloth shutter is all I can think of. I'm looking over mine to see if anything else might be obviously easy to spot but I'm not coming up with much. I think maybe the Zorkis you had to make sure you didn't wind until you selected a shutter speed, or made sure not to select a shutter speed until you wound it or you risked breaking some internal mechanism. I should probably look that up since I forget which I shouldn't be doing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
I keep thinking I want to stop 35mm film photography and then people keep giving me cameras and you can't not shoot them, that would be wrong am I right? A relative of a relative wants to give me a Nikon F80 with the kit lens (some 28-80mm deal). Claims its in near perfect condition and barely used because they stuffed it in the closet the moment digital became a thing. I assume its basically a plastic F100 and should pretty much be just like handling any current Nikon but with film instead of a CMOS; never handled a film camera made after 1980. Would be convenient since the meter in my ME Super just poo poo the bed.
Sauer fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:Is a zorki 4 with (i think) a jupiter 50 f2 worth $50 CAD? Might be able to snag one tonight. Anything in particular I should inspect? I have a Zorki 4, it's a decent enough camera if you want a no-frills rangefinder that's small enough to slip into a pocket. Martytoof is right about the shutter curtain, as with any ~50 year old cloth shutter, it's likely to have pinholes or cracks in it. The cloth can be repaired or even completely replaced fairly easily however. The spring that powers the self timer is also prone to getting uncoiled. That doesn't affect anything else though. The thing about the shutter speed is that you must never change the shutter speed until you have wound the camera on and cocked the shutter. The selector is coupled to the shutter mechanism and, if you change the speed when it's not cocked, the pin that links it can get snapped off when you wind on. This means that you now have a dead camera. When you wind it on, the shutter speed selector should rotate as well, if it doesn't then that means someone has done exactly that before. It uses the standard-for-rangefinders m39 (LTM) mount so there are plenty of lenses kicking around that will work on it including Leica glass if you want to troll the rangefinder forum. The Jupiter 50mm f/2 lens is probably the Jupiter-8 which is a direct copy of the CZJ Sonnar 50mm f/2 lens. If it's not a Jupiter, then it's probably an Industar, which is not a great lens by any measure. The Jupiter lenses were generally pretty good though. If it works and there's no fungus in the lens then $50 CAD is probably worth it. If it works now, then it will carry on working just fine for ever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 12:11
|
|
|
Is the pin a tiny little hair thin piece or does it take a bit of force to break it if you forget to wind first?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
It's a small and not very tough piece of steel. The torque from winding on is more than enough to snap it. If the action is a bit stiff anyway, you won't notice the extra resistance until it's too late.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
I ended up buying it. It looked in decent enough shape and the lens is definitely a jupiter-8 with no fungus or anything, just a few very minor cleaning scuffs on the front element. The shutter speed select was jammed (stuck on 1/8) but I took it anyway thinking I could unstick it. Thankfully there are some really good CLA guides for this camera. I took the top off and removed the slow speed escapement, gave it a ronsonol bath and relubed it. Cleaned the rangefinder glass, etc. Got it back together and it seems to work completely fine now. The CLA guide I used mentioned a flash sync switch around the shutter speed select knob, but mine just has a ring with a bunch of numbers from 0 to 25 or something, with big gaps between. Not a frame counter. I tightened the set screw so it doesn't move but what purpose does that serve? Oh and it's missing the take up spool but there's lots on eBay for cheap BANME.sh fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
It is a frame counter, it's just that you have to manually advance it. As for the flash delay knob, I know it wasn't available on all models, but I'm not sure which ones should have it. e: all this Zorki check reminds me that I should try to get my Zorki 6 repaired. The Claptain fucked around with this message at 14:54 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
The frame counter on a Zorki is on top of the winding knob. The numbers around the shutter speed dial are probably to remind you what film speed you have loaded - if it goes to ~25 then the range is probably in GOST/10 or in DIN rather than ISO. The flash sync selector appears to be instead of that film reminder ring - mine has one but it doesn't have the numbered ring that you describe. Edit: This is the top plate of mine, you can see the flash selector and the frame counter clearly.  Zorki 4 by Iain Compton, on Flickr Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Jul 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
I have misread BANME.sh's post and failed to notice he mentioned shutter speed select dial.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
Helen Highwater posted:The frame counter on a Zorki is on top of the winding knob. The numbers around the shutter speed dial are probably to remind you what film speed you have loaded - if it goes to ~25 then the range is probably in GOST/10 or in DIN rather than ISO. The flash sync selector appears to be instead of that film reminder ring - mine has one but it doesn't have the numbered ring that you describe. Yeah mine looks exactly the same except where yours has X and M for flash sync, mine has this:  You are probably right it's just a DIN reminder knob. Also when I took the top plate off, it looked like the flash sync port just.... didn't connect to anything on the inside.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
The sync port doesn't need to connect to anything. There are no electrical circuits in the body, no TTL metering, it's likely that the chassis itself is the circuit and that pressing the shutter button closes the connection on the back of the PC port. That's how the hotshoe on my Arax works at least and I think a few other cameras with no internal wiring.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
I thought I had a Zorki-4 but after actually looking at it, I remembered it's a FED-2  All this time I thought it was a Z4 but looking at the photos above made me say -- "wait, hang on here". I never use it anyway, my Zorki-6 is definitely preferred because I hate film advance knobs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
I've complained in this thread previously about how finicky it is to scan with my digital camera, especially stitching 6x6 shots. Getting some second hand negative carriers (some sort of Besler 23 types) in the sizes I like significantly simplified the process. They keep the negative dead flat and perfectly in plane with the sensor so I don't need to refocus between frames; set it up once and snap, snap, snap... Also blocks nearly all other light coming from my light table. Quite a bit quicker and simpler to handle. I'm going to suck it up and live with stitching on larger negatives, the quality of "scan" shits all over my flatbed. Never know if a second hand Besler enlarger might happen one day. I shot a roll of HP5 during Canada Day and screwed up a little while developing. I filled the tank with water for a pre-rinse like I normally do and grabbed my half full bottle of DD-X which I haven't used in over a month. Its sealed tightly and I squeeze most of the air out when closing it up but when I opened it the fluid was brownish instead of almost clear like it usually is. I figured that means its probably pooped so I developed the roll with 1:50 Rodinal instead. Worked fine especially with my exposures all being educated guesses since my camera's meter took Canada Day off but Rodinal isn't really the look I like with 400 speed film. Could I have recovered my roll from the tank while it was rinsing and waited until I got some more DD-X? I figured leaving it in water would eventually damage the emulsion. Draining the tank and hanging the film up in the dark to dry may have worked but I didn't want to risk it. Canada Day was rainy, foggy, hot and 100% humidity. Downtown Montreal was still packed with folks celebrating anyway.   
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
This might belong on the scanning thread, but a good bump never killed anyone. One of the reasons I never liked scanning my film is because i found it so drat slow, but I've just realized EPSON scan on OSX likes to hang after every frame if I don't move my mouse when scanning or previewing. I moved my mousepad in circles just so I can get through 10 frames. Then I tried looking for any apps or scripts that could do this for me. Good news for me is that there is one, so I just ran it while scanning the last 10 frames of this roll. No problems whatsoever. But the fact that the scanning software will stop working when I look away is, frankly, the stupidest thing I've ever had to deal with in modern computing. This solution is inelegant, and frankly very stupid as well. It's not just me that's had this problem right? I can't read other sites, or watch youtube videos while scanning since it'll never want to complete it. It could be because I'm still running El Capitan or something. Anyone have this problem before?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
Yes, I have the same issue using Epson's awful macOS software.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
There was a patch for it that fixes that problem. Find your scanner on the epson support site and download the updated driver. I had exactly the same problem on my Mac with my V600.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 12:14
|
|
|
meatpotato posted:Yes, I have the same issue using Epson's awful macOS software. EPSON Scan is a piece of poo poo on Windows too, if it's any consolation. While scanning windows frequently thinks the app is not responding because it blocks the windows message loop while it's waiting on data from the scanner. High quality stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 11:36 |
|
|
so I wonder if all this makes Vuescan or Silverfast worth buying? or if any open-source solution exists somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2017 17:27
|
|