[bensonga]

A question to other 67 300mm ED[IF] lens owners. How smooth is its focus? Mine, I feel, is too smooth. It's only about 180 degrees of rotation from closest to infinity and the slightest accidental touch of the focus grip (which is really wide) means a significant focus changed. It would be nice if there was more resistance in it.

Hi Tuco. My 300mm EDIF lens is the same....almost too smooth, not as much resistance as I would like. By contrast, my Hasselblad CF350 is much better in that regard. The 80-160 A lens I bought for the 645NII is even "smoother" than the 300mm EDIF, so I have to be really careful with the focus on that lens.

Gary

---

Last edited by bensonga; 04-03-2010 at 03:42 PM.

[bensonga]

One more from my Pentax 67. The Anchorage Port (before 9/11 security restrictions). I think this image was taken with either the 75 or 105mm lens on Ilford FP4. Scanned many years ago by a local lab. I cropped this one to a square format....one of the few times when I found square to work better for me than a rectangular image.

Gary

[bensonga]

I seem to have a boat theme going......

Here's another from Seward, Alaska with the P67. Probably the 75 or 105mm lens and Ilford FP4.

Gary

[bensonga]

A couple of images from my first roll of color film using the 645NII. These were taken with the 80-160mm (A) lens. Fuji Provia 100, Epson V750 scan.

Gary

[bensonga]

"Waiting for Spring".....from my first roll of B&W film thru the 645NII. This was taken with a P67 105mm lens, Fuji Acros 100 and Epson V750 Pro scan.

Gary

[lbenac]

Hello,

First roll of 120 on my first MF camera 645 with 55mm/2.8, first flatbed scanner () and first photo posted in this group. As you can gather, it is a first for me

Fomapan Classic 100 developed commercially


Pano from 3 shots



Scanned with Epson V600 at 3200dpi.

The Epson is a huge disappointment on the size of the scan you can get from it.
From what I read the true optical resolution maxed out around 1800dpi and indeed a scan at 3200dpi viewed at 200% and a scan at 6400 dpi are identical in term of details resolution to my eyes.
I was thinking of returning it and pay 2/3 more ($600 versus $249) for the V700 which according to my readings as a true resolution around 2300dpi but then I have a betterscan holder for the V600 on its way and I am starting to think that the gain between the two is probably nominal for 13*19 prints.
So in the future I might have to send a few select negatives for drum scan at $80 each or find $1,500 for a used Nikon 8000 or sell one of my redundant organ for a new Nikon 9000.

Cheers,

Luc

[bensonga]

Nice photos Luc and congrats on the 645! I've never found a need to scan my medium format film at higher than 2400 dpi for the prints I generally make (13x19).

Here's another from my first roll of color film thru the 645NII. Taken with the 80-160mm A series lens. I guess I have a thing for trains, planes and boats.

I'm enjoying using the P645, although I do miss those larger 6x7 negs. Even so, glad I decided to keep the 645NII.

Gary

[lbenac]

Nice photos Luc and congrats on the 645! I've never found a need to scan my medium format film at higher than 2400 dpi for the prints I generally make (13x19).

Thank you. these are just quick test shots. It will take me some time to get used to the 645 - outside of the first whoa looking at the large finder. But the funny thing is that I feel that my 135 shooting will make big progress thanks to the MF shooting.

I am glad to hear that because I was a little bit let down going from this nice big neg to the small scan.

BC and Alaska on many scenary in common

Cheers,

Luc

[tuco]

... So in the future I might have to send a few select negatives for drum scan at $80 each or find $1,500 for a used Nikon 8000 or sell one of my redundant organ for a new Nikon 9000.

Cheers,

Luc

I've seen some nice scans with the V700 (on web). I have the 9000ED and though it does a good job I have come across some negatives I've scanned with my Epson 4990 and rescanned them with the 9000ED and there was hardly any difference for web display and I kept the 4990 version of them.

[lbenac]

I've seen some nice scans with the V700 (on web). I have the 9000ED and though it does a good job I have come across some negatives I've scanned with my Epson 4990 and rescanned them with the 9000ED and there was hardly any difference for web display
Now if you have to sell a body part just to get a 9000ED, I wonder what all those people salivating over the 645D have to sell to get that!

For web display is the key word
What was the verdict for 12*18 prints?
Maybe I am wrong, but after scanning 24*36 with my Minolta 5400 which gives about 4200dpi, I had big expectation for scan from a 56*41.5 negative.
That said I have not printed one of this file yet (I am waiting to have an image worth printing)

Body parts
Well I guess their body parts are worth more than mine - mind you I am pretty healthy - but $10K is probably what I would pay to change my car Of course if photo equipment and supply for amateur were fully tax deductible then it might help

Cheers,

Luc

[tuco]

I've never done a print from the 4990 so I couldn't say. I don't have a good photo printer so I send out. And I have a couple of enlargers so I still do wet prints. But I have done a few from the 9000ED which were nice.

[GeneV]

I've seen some nice scans with the V700 (on web). I have the 9000ED and though it does a good job I have come across some negatives I've scanned with my Epson 4990 and rescanned them with the 9000ED and there was hardly any difference for web display and I kept the 4990 version of them up on my flickr stream. Here are two of them:

• Girls Dressed For Prom Night
• The Cabin

Now if you have to sell a body part just to get a 9000ED, I wonder what all those people salivating over the 645D have to sell to get that!

I saw used Coolscan 9000s offered for 150% of the new price a few months ago. It seems like there is a market here for Nikon or Minolta to bring back their products.

I like those shots on the link. Was the shot of the girls on the Pentax 67?

[tuco]

I saw used Coolscan 9000s offered for 150% of the new price a few months ago. It seems like there is a market here for Nikon or Minolta to bring back their products.

I like those shots on the link. Was the shot of the girls on the Pentax 67?

As of last year I saw a post where someone asked Nikon if they were still being made and the answer was yes.

Thanks, yeah, both are from my 6x7

[hinman]

It is my first roll with Pentax 645N and I used Fuji Pro 400H and Canon 8800F flatbed scanner. I don't think that I know what I am doing. I do have doubt why I bought myself the 645N, I contemplate if 35mm can fit my film interest. I have some doubt into what I am doing as getting the photos developed and scanned turns out to be a lengthy and quite costly process. I don't think I can afford to have time to do my own processing. I am relying on a local lab to develop the film and I do my own scanning. So, I may be limited to C41 preference but my local lab can do wet processing and I am trying out Fuji Acros 100 BW

I ran into few scanning issues mostly on dust and scratches, any suggestions on tools or methods to reduce dust and scratches are welcome. I did some scanning in 4800dpi and later changed to 2400dpi.

What are the right setting in choosing dpi for the 645N films?

My setup with 645N and FA 45mm f/2.8


in 2400 dpi


in 4800 dpi


in 2400dpi

The above are full of scanning errors but I went through it fast just to get a rough idea if my 645N works.

Thanks,
Hin

[EyeSpy]

Yes, I truly hope us 120 Pentaxians are actually using our gear... So folks, show your pics! Make the 35mm folks envy our Big Rigs.

I wanna play with the 6x9's.
"I don't see the world in pixels." , Eyespy in the Year 2010AD