Sorry

*thomascdk* · 08-21-2009, 02:28 AM

I've been looking for a mf camera for some time, and being a Pentax family with regards to 35 and digital, Pentax seemed - at first - obvious. But I ended up with a Mamiya RZ67. Hope I'm still welcome...

I have a Manfrotto 055 tripod, but think it' probably too flimsy. Do you have any advice on tripod?

And scanning. Got a decent, older HP flatbed that does OK'ish on 35 negs, but I guess there's better options out there. Short of a drum, do you have any suggestions?

Ben_Edict · 08-21-2009, 02:49 AM

no reason to say sorry, I use the Mamiya 645 system and have no regrets. Their lenses are really good and the handling of the cameras nice.

With regards to the scanner:

Flatbed scanners are always a compromise for scanning slides and negs, that's clear. They never reach anything near their stated resolution. My Epson V700, which I consider to be the best value for scanning medium and large format is advertised with a 6400dpi resolution, but in reality it lies around 2300dpi. For 35mm slides, thats already on the low side and a dedicated slide scanner would be better. But in terms of density range and colour reproduction it works great, especially combined with Silverfast as the scanning application. For any film formats larger than 35mm the resolution is more than enough and for large formats I would never use the full res of this scanner, as the files (16bit) get too large to work with.

The Epson V750 might be even better for you, as it comes complete with Silverfast and some colour management apps. If you need the additional software, you get it cheaper in the V750 package, than buying the V700 and the software individually. If you already have colour management, the V700 is the economic choice.

A drum scanner would yield better results, clearly visible on the pixel level or if you are going to print wallpapers. For all standard print format, even large posters, the Epsons are fine and affordable alternatives. In all comparissons I have seen so far, they came out as the best choice for scannings slides and negs on a flatbed.

Ben

yurihuta · 08-21-2009, 04:37 PM

I have an 055 (twenty years young) and I think it is sturdy enough for the RZ67. I used to use it with a Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L and I use it with my Pentax 645N gear. I also from time to time use the Manfrotto 190 base with my Pentax 645N and some of the prime lenses (55mm, 75mm and 150mm).

I use a Nikon Coolscan LS 8000 ED as a scanner. I thought long and hard about an Epson V750, but decided the higher dynamic range, glass film holders and focus accuracy were worth the additional money, although I ended up buying a couple of LS 8000 ED, for the price of a good used one - I got lucky, but I also looked a lot and found the deals.

bobt99silver · 08-21-2009, 09:23 PM

The scanner you use really depends upon your expectations.

I have a Epson V500 that I feel does pretty well with medium format film up to ~12"x16" in (fitting a full shot on 13"x19" in paper). I think this scanner is fairly close in performance to the V700, but I don't have comparison data. The v500 is less expensive.

Using it for 35mm film does not give me results I find acceptable.

I use a Nikon 9000 as well, and that is all I'd use for 35 mm film enlargements, but again, when making prints from MF negatives, the 9000 is better, but the V500 can do pretty good up to the size above - it depends on how big you want to print, your expertise with the scanner, and what your expectations are.

Gooshin · 08-22-2009, 03:51 AM

shoot on sight, repeat, shoot on sight.

*PeterAM* · 08-22-2009, 09:38 AM

I just started using a Mamiya 645 1000S and have use of my daughter's RZ67. The RZ67 is a brute to get used to, but once you have looked at a transparency from that camera it all becomes worth it. I use both cameras with Manfrotto 3021 legs and a 322RC2 ball head (the one with the handle): I think that this head is rated for 11 kilos. Works fine. I don't really figure on using my 645 handheld very much, but somewhere along the line will pick up a handle. If you are using the RZ with a prism and want to shoot handheld, you should get one. Great camera.

troyz · 08-22-2009, 11:19 AM

Originally Posted by thomascdk

And scanning. Got a decent, older HP flatbed that does OK'ish on 35 negs, but I guess there's better options out there. Short of a drum, do you have any suggestions?

One of the nice things about medium format is you can get away with scanning at a much lower resolution than 135

You might be okay with the HP as long as the negatives are properly exposed and you're not doing big prints.

FWIW, for medium format I usually get Noritsu scans at time of development (16-base TIFF, which works out to 2048 x 2510 pixels for 6x7 format); less work for me, reduces film handling, and results in a scans are good enough for an 8x10 print if I don't crop very much or rotate the image.

Price per exposure on the TOD scans is much less with 220 film than with 120.

I rent time on a Nikon 8000 for re-scans (glass film holder, "super-fine" mode always); usually at 2000dpi, rarely 4000dpi for tight crops.

Ben_Edict · 08-23-2009, 08:46 AM

Originally Posted by PeterAM

I just started using a Mamiya 645 1000S and have use of my daughter's RZ67. The RZ67 is a brute to get used to, but once you have looked at a transparency from that camera it all becomes worth it. I use both cameras with Manfrotto 3021 legs and a 322RC2 ball head (the one with the handle): I think that this head is rated for 11 kilos. Works fine. I don't really figure on using my 645 handheld very much, but somewhere along the line will pick up a handle. If you are using the RZ with a prism and want to shoot handheld, you should get one. Great camera.

The 322 is rated at under 11 pounds, not kilogramms. I personally wouldn't use it with a RZ, indeed I wouldn't use it at all, unless I needed it for some kind of action shooting, where this handle might be useful. Otherwise I find it too small and the RC2 plates are too small for heavier gear anyway.

Ofcourse you are very right, that a RZ with prism can hardly be used handheld and any tripod would be better than none.

Ben

Ben_Edict · 08-23-2009, 08:49 AM

Originally Posted by troyz

One of the nice things about medium format is you can get away with scanning at a much lower resolution than 135 You might be okay with the HP as long as the negatives are properly exposed and you're not doing big prints.

In terms of resolution you are right. But scanning is also a matter of colour depth and density. And here the differences between lower and higher quality scanners are very significant. The Epson V700 combined with Silverfast (the software makes a big difference) reaches a Dmax = 4.0 - which is plenty for 95% of shots. Only those BW shots taken in extremely contrasty situations will exceed this density.

Ben

*thomascdk* · 08-23-2009, 02:40 PM

Thanks for the replies.

After trying it out this weekend the Manfrotto 055probx seems to do the job.

I'm seriously considering the Epson - sounds like an ok trade-off between price and quality.

unixrevolution · 08-24-2009, 07:04 AM

Originally Posted by thomascdk

I've been looking for a mf camera for some time, and being a Pentax family with regards to 35 and digital, Pentax seemed - at first - obvious. But I ended up with a Mamiya RZ67. Hope I'm still welcome...

I have a Manfrotto 055 tripod, but think it' probably too flimsy. Do you have any advice on tripod?

And scanning. Got a decent, older HP flatbed that does OK'ish on 35 negs, but I guess there's better options out there. Short of a drum, do you have any suggestions?

My friend has an RB, and he loves it. Welcome to the forum!

I just got a Canon CanoScan 8800f, but i'm not sure how good it is. I've had zero time to play with it. It is highly reviewed and inexpensive, however, and it does handle 35mm slides, negatives, and 120 negatives, plus scans prints.

Mattferrit · 08-24-2009, 07:50 AM

The RZ67, a joy to use, aswell as the RB67. Personal preference lead me to the Pentax 67.
I use the V750 and have used the V700, both very good scanners falling short of a drum.
Never used the V500 but i'm sure it's very good too.