Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-09-2015, 04:52 PM - 1 Like   #76
Senior Member
Paul MaudDib's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 292
This is stupid but one of the draws for me is that it's easier to get good scans out of MF film. Consumer scanners lie like crazy about their resolution - a V500/V600 flatbed puts out about 1500 real dpi, a V700 puts out about 2300 dpi. For a 35mm negative that translates into 3.6 MP for a V500 and 7MP for a V700. In comparison scans from 120 scans are much more workable - even 6x4.5 is 2.6x the area (and resolution) of a 35mm negative.

Being honest, film is fun but there's no question whatsoever that it's expensive and it's a hassle. If I'm going to deal with it, I at least want it to be reasonably competitive with the quality I could get from digital. To do that with 35mm would be prohibitively expensive - to start getting an appreciable amount of the resolution from digitizing a 35mm negative you are really talking about a professional film scanner ala Nikon/Imacon/etc or drum scans. That's too much upfront cost. On the other hand I can get a very reasonable amount of resolution from any 120 negative even with a crap scanner. And at the same time, it lessens the requirements on the rest of the process. I can get results that look reasonable on the scanner with even modest MF gear. And dust is not quite as constant a battle as on 35mm - it's there but it's much easier to ignore or to spot.

Next point - wet printing is the best thing since sliced bread. I'm a software engineer and I spend all day on the computer. Pulling the negatives out of the photo-flo and seeing the thing you've been slaving over to protect in pure darkness is so rewarding. And, going into a quiet darkroom and making some prints with my hands is incredibly relaxing. Wet prints are the sharpest way to make a print, bar none. 35mm makes a fantastic 8x10 and MF prints are something to behold. Honestly wet prints are part of the thing that makes flatbed scans so disappointing for me. They prove to me that the resolution is there on the neg - I just can't get it out with my scanner. Also despite being pretty good with a scanner I still can't hold a candle to my split-filter printing. I can take the crappiest, most blown exposure, and in five minutes it's a beautiful print. I moved away from my last darkroom - I really need to get back into it.

The shoulder of negative film is also amazing. Being able to blow an exposure and have a reasonable chance of recovering it is very, very useful. Again, see split filter printing and how you can recover terrible negatives.

The last factor is that 35mm gear is still sought-after by digital photographers. MF gear has been out of favor for almost a decade now and prices are very affordable. You can buy professional-grade gear for peanuts. There are good buys in 35mm gear, like Samyang and Sigma, but MF gear is in "impulse-buy" territory for all but the best kits.

Anyway, with that, if anyone wants to sell some pro-grade scanner gear that might do better at 35mm please hit me up. I can't darkroom in my current apartment and it kinda sucks. If the scanner will deliver and you've got the software to run it - I'm willing to run SCSI, MacOS, whatever.

11-09-2015, 09:20 PM   #77
Senior Member
Paul MaudDib's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by Tjompen1968 Quote
Pentax 6x7 with 105/2.4 @ f/4, 1/1000 and extension tube #1

I have one shot @ f/2.4 but then her forhead is out of focus. Pretty much only her eyes are sharp on that one.

Shot on Kodak Ektar 100. Developed at home with Tetenal Rapid kit.

FWIW I'm viewing at 4K and she's still sharp.
11-11-2015, 03:19 PM   #78
Site Supporter
chickentender's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,875
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul MaudDib Quote
This is stupid but one of the draws for me is that it's easier to get good scans out of MF film.
Not stupid whatsoever... In this day and age, it approaches necessity (for most it simply IS necessary) to get digital images of quality regardless of your chosen format. MF is the best of these worlds, allowing the tonality and that legendary tone-curve you want/expect with minimal effort and cost. I've created some wonderful images shooting raw with my digitals, but by and large, unless I spend considerable time in PP, they are devoid of the (as you mention) drama that a comparable film-shot image holds out of the gate. An Epson V700 and a full P67 kit is still far below the cost of a digital equiv kit. Boring narrative at this point... but is still true to me at least. I shoot my digital when I want to experiment "cost" free or when I'm just lazy, or when I'm out of a film I'd like to use... but I won't be replacing, say, my K-3 anytime in the foreseeable future (and honestly a part of me wishes I'd just stuck with the K-5 three years ago) and I'm happy that way. It's paid for, works amazingly well for what it is and I'll continue to amortize it for a long while (read: sparingly because it doesn't get a whole lot of use since I'm back to shooting film again finally, around 90% of the time).
11-12-2015, 02:49 PM   #79
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,098
By getting good deals I have a Hasselblad 500 C/M with 3 lenses plus a Nikon CS8000 scanner all for less than the price of the upcoming Pentax Full Frame. If I had the Pentax 645 and did not like the square format so much I probably would find the cash to buy a 645D whereas I have no interest in buying the new FF Pentax. I think there is a reason why when I looked at the new as of Tuesday B&H catalogue or an old one from the 70s there is such a variety of camera formats.

11-14-2015, 09:29 AM - 3 Likes   #80
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 211
I don't have all the formats taken at one time, but perhaps the same subject will do?

35mm Pentax SF-1



6x45 Pentax 645N



6x6 Rolleiflex



6x9 Fuji GW690



4x5 Crown Graphic



10x8 Chamonix



Perhaps not better, but certainly different.

Chris
11-15-2015, 12:05 AM   #81
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 22
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by drmoss_ca Quote
I don't have all the formats taken at one time, but perhaps the same subject will do?

35mm Pentax SF-1



6x45 Pentax 645N



6x6 Rolleiflex



6x9 Fuji GW690



4x5 Crown Graphic



10x8 Chamonix



Perhaps not better, but certainly different.

Chris
Chris. thanks for putting those images together for us. Obviously you are a skillful photographer...and you have a very willing and patient model.

Since I am the designated devil's advocate here...it would have been a real challenge to show us the images without any references to format. I will gladly yield the floor to anyone willing to point out factors such as tonality, the tone curve or the drama evident in these beautiful shots. one compared to another. Like Chris, I see differences, I am hopeful those with experience can share what they see in the MF's that are not evident in that pretty darn nice 35mm.

I sense the subtleties and nuances you may see are likely attributes I am probably not even aware of. Thanks.

Dave
11-16-2015, 07:44 AM   #82
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 12
I don't know why when people show print's for comparison photo they show the different format's and each with it's own photo. even in the one right above, same woman but each shot is different. If you really want to compare I would think that the same image would be done with each format and in the same light.
11-16-2015, 02:49 PM   #83
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 211
Of course, you are right, Don. I couldn't quite bring myself to load up all the cameras and develop all those films just for one frame from each to be used in this thread. Dreadfully lazy, I know!

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, 645z, 6x7, butte, camera, delta, flickr, format, grain, images, medium format, pentax, pentax 6x7, shot, shutter
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How much did film bodies and film-era lenses originally cost? Outis Pentax Film SLR Discussion 90 12-30-2015 01:19 AM
How Do You Know How "Fish-Eye" A Lens Is? reivax Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 03-07-2013 11:15 AM
How do I know the film is advancing ? pcarfan Pentax Film SLR Discussion 4 06-26-2010 08:13 PM
How do you know that SR is working? kitkat Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 07-30-2009 07:55 AM
How do you know if your lens is focusing right? hmcfly Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 04-29-2008 10:03 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:41 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top