Ian although this is the wrong forum for my answer I will give it anyway the 700/750 is a good scanner but the OEM filmholders are less than great if you want the best possible results from your setup you should get costum made aftermarket filmholders that are better at holding the film flat. Google is your friend.
I also fully agree with the rest of jp498 post
Last edited by MDR; 12-03-2013 at 04:48 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Thegman pretty much said it for me. I would only add that I have been a programmer for over 30 years and found that I just couldn't stand any more of the behavior (sitting at a keyboard with my hand on a mouse) that digital requires.
Originally Posted by thegman
“You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.” - John Galt
I like the challenge. I owned an ETRSi and it's a great system. However, it's too modern for my tastes now. I'm mostly using pre-war cameras with uncoated lenses.
Kent in SD
A couple weeks ago I was in my office when one of the young PhDs from upstairs popped in. While talking he noticed some BW prints I had hanging around and started going off on how he could tell these were film and not digital because of the dynamic range and detail in the highlights and shadows. I was flabbergasted. I never expected to here this from someone just a little older than the car I drive every day.
What I love about shooting film is projecting a 645 frame transparency onto a large screen, with the dynamic range of a projected image (vs. the lesser dynamic range of ANY printed image!
Digital is absolutely pathetic in this regard...HDTV is paltry 1920 x 1040, so the highest resolution digital projectors do no better than that. Even the 4K 'high resolution' digital cinema standard seen in movie theaters everywhere are unable to even equal the 5700 x 3800 resolution of a top dSLR, at best they project only 70% of the resolution of the captured image.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Welcome Ian. Well, I have the same camera and use a V750 scanner, without the Better Scanning holders. I like film because the cameras are fun. I particularly like the waist-level finder (although its less practical on an ETRS than a square format camera) because of the 3d look when composing with 2 eyes open. I like the feel of cranking to advance the film. I like the suspense of unrolling the negatives after developing to see how they came out. I like the look of the big colour transparencies held up to the window light. (Even though colour negative film generally scans better, it doesn't give the same thrill to look at). I like to shoot black and white infrared film, which I cant easily do with d****** unless I get the sensor hacked.
That said, I have been doing the hybrid thing for a couple years now, and I don't find for my scanner and camera that I could not have gotten the same or better look with d****** except for a few cases. Scanning, unfortunately, is a real Pain, especially with film that curls. Experiment with the little variable height tabs on the Epson film holders to find the best of the three possible heights for your scanner. i hear the Better Scanning holders can do much better.
The V750 will get you results on a par with your DSLR but not really any technical improvement except in the ability to capture greater dynamic range in a negative with less care spent metering, and that's WITH the fancy holders. Any good medium/slow film will resolve much more than you can extract with that scanner, but that's OK - you can go back and wet-print a couple special shots later (there are darkrooms for hire and some photo clubs have them that you can use for free as a member, etc... and all of the gear for your own basic B&W darkroom costs about 1/2 of what you paid for the scanner) or pay to have them drum-scanned, both of which will get everything out. However drum scanning is $$$$ and wet-printing is hugely time-consuming.
As has been said, projected 645 and 6x6 slides are truly a sight to behold; they have a clarity and presence unmatched by any other medium. Larger slides are theoretically better, but 6x6 is the largest size you can get affordable (under $500) projectors for.
Personally I wouldn't bother with 645 as the quality isn't much (or any!) increase over what you get from a flagship DSLR and you lose all the high-iso performance and camera stabilisation by going to film. However if you shoot 6x7 or large format with slow film, there are huge gains to be made in final print quality.
The whole craft aspect is different to digital. A bit more tactile. A matter of personal preference as to which you prefer.
The V700 and (northern hemisphere) V750 is OK but not a patch on high-end drum scanning (not as expensive as people think), which is preferred for exhibition quality prints. The V700 here rarely gets any use now because the lab prefers its own scanner and colourimetrics to clients and it does save time for both client and lab. I use both A and D, but print more from film than I do from digi. You might want to consider and appreciate the permanence of film over other media types, and of course nothing beats looking a beautiful transparency (or neg!) on the lightbox. Having said that, scanning is a lot of work compared to the quick, straight-forward, "it's all done for you" nature of digital; I enjoy and thrive with analogue because it is the thinking person's medium and requires foundation skill and judgement in photography.
.::Gary Rowan Higgins
A comfort zone is a wonderful place. But nothing ever grows there.
I use a V750 every week to scan film. Its better than what I get from a pro lab here in town that does a great business developing film. They don't check for colors they way I do, plus they crop too much. I get good control and can set up 8 shots at once (645) and go get something done while the scanner is churning away. I know I could go have something drum scanned, but I don't have galleries pounding on my door asking for prints, who does? If that happens, I will hand my negs over to a pro service and have them print the stuff 30 x 60, mounted, frames and all.
To the OP: having been in the same spot recently I recommend this approach:
Get the camera, shoot some film, have it developed and scanned at your lab.
If you find yourself smitten* after a few rolls then get your scanner and use the OEM holders till you pixel peep yourself into a tizzy, then buy the other holders if you just cant stand it.
Print from a lab that prints on photo paper; its cheap; you get great results and you get to skip the whole "Which ink jet should I buy?" business. If that turns out too simple; you want more? You want to go Whole Hog Analog? Then set up your dark room.
*If you decide, "Meh, whatever..."; sell the gear to someone that will use it and skip the pricey scanner.
One thing at a time basically.
Last edited by trythis; 12-03-2013 at 10:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.
"If its not broken, I can't afford it."
I agree with the advice of trythis. I just realized you didn't buy the scanner yet. Yes, get the camera only for now, and shoot some film to be developed and scanned by a lab. I would start with Ilford XP2 for black and white and Portra for colour because they scan well and are forgiving. Real black and white film is best developed yourself, because a lab won't easily customize to your film and exposure index. Use the lab's medium res scans, which are usually inexpensive, and then consider getting your own scanner when that is not enough.