Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Gooshin · 10-21-2009, 10:30 AM

are mostly snapshots and i dont like them

i also dont like Kodak 400TX, in fact i dont like any Kodak b/w film

i'm going to try Ektar 100 next...

but my first overall impressions are mixed, rather bulky compared to a 35mm camera, also i have to resort to a flatbed scanner for these as a dedicated MF film scanner is out of my budget for now..

75mm F2.8 @ 1/10th iso400

75mm F4.0 @ 1/1000 ISO400

75mm F4.0 @ 1/500 (or something) ISO400

75mm F2.8 @1/350 ISO 400

Nesster · 10-21-2009, 10:41 AM

Damn it, that newfangled 645N contraption works!

I HATE 400TX, the damn thing is a dust magnet and furthermore scans with strange color variations... and did I mention how it curls? And bows? The traditional Kodak film (pan-x, tri-x) is much better.

Gooshin · 10-21-2009, 10:59 AM

the film advance scared the shit out of me when i took the first shot.

Nesster · 10-21-2009, 11:15 AM

Yes, this is definitely a camera you want to take to some quiet place... and the thing has some torque, maybe it's not really doing this, but I feel my 645 is trying to twist itself out of my hands when the advance does its thing.

Have you faced this one yet: you load up the film... and not quite sure if you should hit the shutter to advance it to #1? Or does the N do that automatically, like a motorized 35mm cam?

Gooshin · 10-21-2009, 11:17 AM

havent loaded new film into it yet.

it will come it will come

i'm still planning on buying my own chemicals.. that will come too...

i keep trying to convince my friend to sell "our" Nikon 5000, his Epson V700, add another 5 bills, and purcahse the Nikon 9000!!!

Nesster · 10-21-2009, 11:23 AM

you can always sell your car or house to get a Hassy scanner...

BTW, I saw some guy today in Union Square, he had a 6x7 with the wood handle around his neck. It didn't seem that much worse than a 645.

Gooshin · 10-21-2009, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by Nesster

you can always sell your car or house to get a Hassy scanner...

BTW, I saw some guy today in Union Square, he had a 6x7 with the wood handle around his neck. It didn't seem that much worse than a 645.

hard to be a ninja though with that sort of thing..

bc_the_path · 10-21-2009, 11:41 AM

Gooshin,
I think you should separate the quality of/on the film from that of the scanner. The film you mention is made for a conventional darkroom printing. And, the flatbed scanners are -as far as I know- usually not the best tools to extract information from films.
My frustrations during the early phase of shooting with a 645N was mainly due to scanning issues.
I still like the camera, though I find little opportunity to use it routinely.

I suggest (to myself, as well!) that, if we are going to scan the film and print the digital data, we need a workflow just for this. (Which may mean using C41 films even for monochrome work).
If, on the other hand, we will be using a conventional darkroom, the workflow (not the camera!) should be different.
I guess the film you tried can be a source for excellent photos in a conventional darkroom, even while the scanned images look rather flat.

I also happen to use a Kiev88CM medium format camera and the necessity to wind the film manually (a rather tricky thing) reminds me of the sweet, spontaneous, musical, "auto" movement of the film in the 645N.

tuco · 10-21-2009, 08:49 PM

Originally posted by Gooshin

i also dont like Kodak 400TX, in fact i dont like any Kodak b/w film

Shall I give you some links to some great 320TXP, 125PX and TMX shots? It is not the film. Any problems using them stands behind the camera.

Try adjusting your pictures so your whites are "white" in the graphics editor. It will improve your results.
.

**yurihuta** · 10-22-2009, 09:48 AM

You still have to depress the shutter release on the 645N to get it to advance to the first frame (as least on my two bodies this is the case).

Originally posted by Nesster

Have you faced this one yet: you load up the film... and not quite sure if you should hit the shutter to advance it to #1? Or does the N do that automatically, like a motorized 35mm cam?

**yurihuta** · 10-22-2009, 09:55 AM

Hey folks,
Take a look around for a used Nikon Coolscan LS 8000 ED. I have purchased a couple in the last two years for well under $1000 USD. They are out there. There was one this past week on photo.net for $800 USD - and I purchsed one just over half of that in great condition.

latex · 02-06-2010, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by bc_the_path

Gooshin,
I think you should separate the quality of/on the film from that of the scanner. The film you mention is made for a conventional darkroom printing. And, the flatbed scanners are -as far as I know- usually not the best tools to extract information from films.
My frustrations during the early phase of shooting with a 645N was mainly due to scanning issues.
I still like the camera, though I find little opportunity to use it routinely.

I suggest (to myself, as well!) that, if we are going to scan the film and print the digital data, we need a workflow just for this. (Which may mean using C41 films even for monochrome work).
If, on the other hand, we will be using a conventional darkroom, the workflow (not the camera!) should be different.
I guess the film you tried can be a source for excellent photos in a conventional darkroom, even while the scanned images look rather flat.

I also happen to use a Kiev88CM medium format camera and the necessity to wind the film manually (a rather tricky thing) reminds me of the sweet, spontaneous, musical, "auto" movement of the film in the 645N.

I read in "Scanning Negatives and Slides" by Sasha Steinhoff that b&w films in general don't scan very easily and that every defect (dust and scratches) gets picked up...

GeneV · 02-06-2010, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by latex

I read in "Scanning Negatives and Slides" by Sasha Steinhoff that b&w films in general don't scan very easily and that every defect (dust and scratches) gets picked up...

That has been my experience scanning 35mm. (I'm still waiting for my first rolls from the 645). Shoot TX, and you will be using the spot healing brush tool on you skies.

GeneV · 02-06-2010, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by Gooshin

are mostly snapshots and i dont like them

i also dont like Kodak 400TX, in fact i dont like any Kodak b/w film

i'm going to try Ektar 100 next...

but my first overall impressions are mixed, rather bulky compared to a 35mm camera, also i have to resort to a flatbed scanner for these as a dedicated MF film scanner is out of my budget for now..

75mm F2.8 @ 1/10th iso400

75mm F4.0 @ 1/1000 ISO400

75mm F4.0 @ 1/500 (or something) ISO400

75mm F2.8 @1/350 ISO 400

Very nice start. You should post a link to these over on the "show us your 645 photos" thread. Right now, most of the photos are 67 (and there are some superb ones).

GeneV · 02-06-2010, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by bc_the_path

I suggest (to myself, as well!) that, if we are going to scan the film and print the digital data, we need a workflow just for this. (Which may mean using C41 films even for monochrome work).

The roll in my 645 right now is Ilford XP2. I used to shoot a lot of XP1 in 35mm, and I hope I like the look in 120, because the Coolscan9000 without any Digital ICE is a bit of a pain. The scanner resolves every fleck and speck, and the Giotto only makes a dent.

10-21-2009, 08:49 PM	#9
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,033	Originally posted by Gooshin i also dont like Kodak 400TX, in fact i dont like any Kodak b/w film Shall I give you some links to some great 320TXP, 125PX and TMX shots? It is not the film. Any problems using them stands behind the camera. Try adjusting your pictures so your whites are "white" in the graphics editor. It will improve your results. . Last edited by tuco; 10-21-2009 at 08:57 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The time has come ... for 645N	Matus	Pentax Medium Format	32	04-05-2011 04:21 PM
Pentax 645N	Ole	Pentax Medium Format	2	04-05-2011 04:17 PM
645N and Eneloops?	Swift1	Pentax Medium Format	7	10-01-2010 11:13 AM
Photo of the 645N	Adam	Pentax Medium Format	3	04-30-2010 01:52 PM
645n Camera	jbrowning	Pentax Medium Format	7	02-02-2009 04:56 PM

10-21-2009, 10:30 AM	#1
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	first pics from my 645N are mostly snapshots and i dont like them i also dont like Kodak 400TX, in fact i dont like any Kodak b/w film i'm going to try Ektar 100 next... but my first overall impressions are mixed, rather bulky compared to a 35mm camera, also i have to resort to a flatbed scanner for these as a dedicated MF film scanner is out of my budget for now.. 75mm F2.8 @ 1/10th iso400 75mm F4.0 @ 1/1000 ISO400 75mm F4.0 @ 1/500 (or something) ISO400 75mm F2.8 @1/350 ISO 400

10-21-2009, 10:41 AM	#2
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Damn it, that newfangled 645N contraption works! I HATE 400TX, the damn thing is a dust magnet and furthermore scans with strange color variations... and did I mention how it curls? And bows? The traditional Kodak film (pan-x, tri-x) is much better.

10-21-2009, 10:59 AM	#3
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610 Original Poster	the film advance scared the shit out of me when i took the first shot.

10-21-2009, 11:15 AM	#4
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Yes, this is definitely a camera you want to take to some quiet place... and the thing has some torque, maybe it's not really doing this, but I feel my 645 is trying to twist itself out of my hands when the advance does its thing. Have you faced this one yet: you load up the film... and not quite sure if you should hit the shutter to advance it to #1? Or does the N do that automatically, like a motorized 35mm cam?

10-21-2009, 11:17 AM	#5
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610 Original Poster	havent loaded new film into it yet. it will come it will come i'm still planning on buying my own chemicals.. that will come too... i keep trying to convince my friend to sell "our" Nikon 5000, his Epson V700, add another 5 bills, and purcahse the Nikon 9000!!!

10-21-2009, 11:23 AM	#6
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	you can always sell your car or house to get a Hassy scanner... BTW, I saw some guy today in Union Square, he had a 6x7 with the wood handle around his neck. It didn't seem that much worse than a 645.

10-21-2009, 11:26 AM	#7
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610 Original Poster	Originally posted by Nesster you can always sell your car or house to get a Hassy scanner... BTW, I saw some guy today in Union Square, he had a 6x7 with the wood handle around his neck. It didn't seem that much worse than a 645. hard to be a ninja though with that sort of thing..

10-21-2009, 11:41 AM	#8
bc_the_path Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Ankara, Turkey Photos: Gallery Posts: 401	Gooshin, I think you should separate the quality of/on the film from that of the scanner. The film you mention is made for a conventional darkroom printing. And, the flatbed scanners are -as far as I know- usually not the best tools to extract information from films. My frustrations during the early phase of shooting with a 645N was mainly due to scanning issues. I still like the camera, though I find little opportunity to use it routinely. I suggest (to myself, as well!) that, if we are going to scan the film and print the digital data, we need a workflow just for this. (Which may mean using C41 films even for monochrome work). If, on the other hand, we will be using a conventional darkroom, the workflow (not the camera!) should be different. I guess the film you tried can be a source for excellent photos in a conventional darkroom, even while the scanned images look rather flat. I also happen to use a Kiev88CM medium format camera and the necessity to wind the film manually (a rather tricky thing) reminds me of the sweet, spontaneous, musical, "auto" movement of the film in the 645N.

10-22-2009, 09:48 AM	#10
yurihuta Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Washington DC, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 632	You still have to depress the shutter release on the 645N to get it to advance to the first frame (as least on my two bodies this is the case). Originally posted by Nesster Have you faced this one yet: you load up the film... and not quite sure if you should hit the shutter to advance it to #1? Or does the N do that automatically, like a motorized 35mm cam?

10-22-2009, 09:55 AM	#11
yurihuta Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Washington DC, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 632	Hey folks, Take a look around for a used Nikon Coolscan LS 8000 ED. I have purchased a couple in the last two years for well under $1000 USD. They are out there. There was one this past week on photo.net for $800 USD - and I purchsed one just over half of that in great condition.

02-06-2010, 01:08 AM	#12
latex New Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: San Francisco, CA, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 4	Originally posted by bc_the_path Gooshin, I think you should separate the quality of/on the film from that of the scanner. The film you mention is made for a conventional darkroom printing. And, the flatbed scanners are -as far as I know- usually not the best tools to extract information from films. My frustrations during the early phase of shooting with a 645N was mainly due to scanning issues. I still like the camera, though I find little opportunity to use it routinely. I suggest (to myself, as well!) that, if we are going to scan the film and print the digital data, we need a workflow just for this. (Which may mean using C41 films even for monochrome work). If, on the other hand, we will be using a conventional darkroom, the workflow (not the camera!) should be different. I guess the film you tried can be a source for excellent photos in a conventional darkroom, even while the scanned images look rather flat. I also happen to use a Kiev88CM medium format camera and the necessity to wind the film manually (a rather tricky thing) reminds me of the sweet, spontaneous, musical, "auto" movement of the film in the 645N. I read in "Scanning Negatives and Slides" by Sasha Steinhoff that b&w films in general don't scan very easily and that every defect (dust and scratches) gets picked up...

02-06-2010, 09:56 AM	#13
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by latex I read in "Scanning Negatives and Slides" by Sasha Steinhoff that b&w films in general don't scan very easily and that every defect (dust and scratches) gets picked up... That has been my experience scanning 35mm. (I'm still waiting for my first rolls from the 645). Shoot TX, and you will be using the spot healing brush tool on you skies.

02-06-2010, 09:59 AM	#14
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Gooshin are mostly snapshots and i dont like them i also dont like Kodak 400TX, in fact i dont like any Kodak b/w film i'm going to try Ektar 100 next... but my first overall impressions are mixed, rather bulky compared to a 35mm camera, also i have to resort to a flatbed scanner for these as a dedicated MF film scanner is out of my budget for now.. 75mm F2.8 @ 1/10th iso400 75mm F4.0 @ 1/1000 ISO400 75mm F4.0 @ 1/500 (or something) ISO400 75mm F2.8 @1/350 ISO 400 Very nice start. You should post a link to these over on the "show us your 645 photos" thread. Right now, most of the photos are 67 (and there are some superb ones).

02-06-2010, 10:05 AM	#15
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by bc_the_path I suggest (to myself, as well!) that, if we are going to scan the film and print the digital data, we need a workflow just for this. (Which may mean using C41 films even for monochrome work). The roll in my 645 right now is Ilford XP2. I used to shoot a lot of XP1 in 35mm, and I hope I like the look in 120, because the Coolscan9000 without any Digital ICE is a bit of a pain. The scanner resolves every fleck and speck, and the Giotto only makes a dent.

first pics from my 645N

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!