Search results

The grain really works here.

There is already another thread....

That's the same lame and simplistic argument that you pushed in two others threads: Kodak= everything. Wanna get on my ignore list for another week? Just say the word.

I hope that Fuji capitalizes appropriately.

That's cool! Needs a snowman at the top?

So does the focus confirmation work with the older non AF lenses? The confirmation interests me more than AF itself. With a 645 afd it was pretty helpful at times. And I am assuming that my eyes are not going to get better in the long run...

Very interesting image!

What a gem!

The cheapest is probably this: http://www.freestylephoto.biz/1901815-Arista-EDU-Ultra-BandW-100-iso-8x10-50-sheets?cat_id=404 Then there is old aerographic...

Looks like your darkslide might be bent a bit- probably no big deal. Only one way to know for sure if there is a problem, check it out as I mentioned.

I am just waiting for someone to come along and say they look fake because you used digital :munch:

I have no clue whether what you propose will work but I am intrigued! I think you'd want a maskless c41 film e.g. Rollei digibase.

Bear in mind that it was a technical tour de force, to design and build this lens. Perhaps it wasn't made to be used or even to be kept in a velvet box. Nikon may have been made it for the same reason that automakers make a concept car: because they can and the other guys can't. I, for one...

KRST won't do squat for a very thin neg. Neither will chromium (I have some and can attest). Neither is particularly good for "saving" a very thin neg, they will merely make a thin neg more easily printable. Know the curve; become the curve; use the curve ;) Paper has a narrow range and...

If I remember correctly, my back has some screws for adjustment; why not check your registry. You could open the back and put some ground glass or thin paper there....

If the neg is really thin, then what about making an interpositive on film first. You can play more curve and compensation tricks with film and film developers than with paper. What you want to do is take all that detail compressed in the shadows and spread it over the linear portion of the...

The blurriness isn't a problem of the film, that's for almost certain. You might check your focus. You may well need to underexpose fp100c to protect highlights. It just depends whether you value highlight or shadow detail more, and how you meter. Are you average or spot metering?

I am struggling; I need some support. Why would I not try a Rollei 6008AF? It's a Rollei. It's square. It's got lots of coloured buttons and dials. It's AF. It's 6008. What's not to like? Help me. Anybody here got one? This thing is costly but intriguing.

classic!

Well... I think it's wonderful that someone is willing to invest substantially in a lens that they believe will suit their needs, whatever those may be. That's all I'm saying ;)

Very nice!

I have been thinking of using an enlarger. The beselers I have can rock back...

Terrific!

See I praise something and its value goes up, interesting how that works! I bought it for $420 a couple years ago.

Bah.... Nikon 50/1.2, $450, and worth every penny.

Ah physics :) Anyway, the basic point, for those who care to know, is that lens design issues tend to reduce resolution at wide apertures, whereas diffraction tends to reduce performance at small apertures. Thus the best performance is typically at intermediate apertures. For RF lenses...

Interesting. I haven't seen Pandora's Box. The only b&w film that comes to mind offhand is Metropolis. I guess I need to do some film watching!

P.S. Ah-Ha! Contax G 45/2 has better MTF at f/4 than at f/8. Not really a surprise to those of us who've beheld one. http://www.photodo.com/lens/Contax-G-Planar-45mm-f2-783 I'd expect the same of the konica hexar AF 35 and the comparable Leica and Zeiss lenses.

Anything RC and multigrade and preflashed... and with no watermarks.

Oh I'd be willing to bet a matted print that the contax g lenses are at their best a few stops wider than that. But anyway I have yet to see a photograph for which any of this matters.