Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,901   Posts: 1,584,434   Online: 786
      
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 42
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    fairfield county, Ct.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,829
    Images
    24

    MF

    Try a Ricoh TLR and some Fuji Acros100
    Peter

  2. #12
    jimgalli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Tonopah Nevada
    Shooter
    ULarge Format
    Posts
    3,422
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    156
    I paid $65 for my Minolta Autocord. $85 for a Yashicamat 124 G for my daughter. Your idea is sound, just wait a bit for a good camera at a good price. The Autocord makes stunning negs on Velvia with it's little 75mm f3.5 Tessar type lens.
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep..to gain that which he cannot lose. Jim Elliot, 1949

    http://tonopahpictures.0catch.com

  3. #13
    battra92's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    217
    Again, I have to echo what everyone else is saying: Why do you want MF?

    If you want a larger format, or maybe if you like square images a 6x6 folder or TLR will do the trick. There are some great 6x6 folders from Zeiss Ikon, Agfa (Ansco), and Voigtlander. I have an Ansco Speedex 45 Special with the Apotar lens and it takes some great images.

    For 645, I have a Nettar 515 with a Novar Anastigmat (three element) lens that takes fantastic 645 chromes and fits right in your pocket.

    Some may say you need a Tessar or Solinar or whatever. Honestly, I would be damned to beat my Ikon for what I use it for. I'm sure someone should show me a lens comparison at wide open how a Tessar is so much better but 1) I almost never shoot at wide open and 2) I like the look of my Novar.

    It's hard to put an exact price on these things as shutter and lens combos make all the difference. However, on eBay I got my 515 for around $30 and it's miles and miles ahead of any Holga in terms of a quality camera.

    TLRs are fun, but admiditly the "best" TLR I have is an Argoflex E, which is not a bad camera at all, it's just not all that great.

  4. #14
    kb244's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Mi
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    818
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by battra92
    ...
    For 645, I have a Nettar 515 with a Novar Anastigmat (three element) lens that takes fantastic 645 chromes and fits right in your pocket.
    ...
    I wuv my Nettar




    But its as you say, small pocketible, decently sharp I think the lens on mine might be the same as yours, The only downside to the one I own is that it needs some cleaning on the shutter, speeds above 1/10th of a second seem to be close to accurate but anything slower gets stuck. But far as 'scanning' resolution on a flatbed, I'd easily get 8 to 12 megapixels off the camera above on some Fuji Neopan Arcos, or ilford FP4+.

    examples:








    I think you can get a Nettar 515 for under a 100$ now days in dare I say working condition.

    Theres also a Nettar 515/B which is just a 6x9 variation of the small guy.
    -Karl Blessing
    Karl Blessing.com
    The Bokeh
    Color Film always existed. It's just the world was always black and white till recently.

  5. #15
    battra92's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by kb244
    But far as 'scanning' resolution on a flatbed, I'd easily get 8 to 12 megapixels off the camera above on some Fuji Neopan Arcos, or ilford FP4+.
    I admit to being ignorant here, how do you figure what megapixels you get out of the film?

  6. #16
    kb244's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Mi
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    818
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by battra92
    I admit to being ignorant here, how do you figure what megapixels you get out of the film?
    You scan at say 2400 DPI.
    Then you zoom in at 100% after doing any touch ups or dust spotting needed. Then you downsample (decrease the resolution) until the pixels at 100% view appear sharp. Then you take the X times the Y to figure the megapixels. Rarely do any of my stuff appear sharp right at 2400 DPI, so I just scan that as the ceiling and downsample til sharp.
    -Karl Blessing
    Karl Blessing.com
    The Bokeh
    Color Film always existed. It's just the world was always black and white till recently.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    775
    If you scan at 2400 ppi (pixels per inch), and the film is 2.25 inches square then you get 5400 pixels per side. 5400 x 5400 = 29.160 megapixels per image. As mentioned above, it may not always be that simple, a lot depends on the film and the scanner.

  8. #18
    kb244's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Mi
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    818
    Images
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg_E
    If you scan at 2400 ppi (pixels per inch), and the film is 2.25 inches square then you get 5400 pixels per side. 5400 x 5400 = 29.160 megapixels per image. As mentioned above, it may not always be that simple, a lot depends on the film and the scanner.
    exactly, which is why you have to use discretion from shot to shot, because it depends on.

    -Film Size
    -Film Sharpness
    -Film Grain
    -Lens Sharpness
    -Lens Focus
    -Scanner Focus
    -Film's Flatness on the Scanner
    etc.

    But when I say something like "I get yada yada MPixels on such and such" , I'm speaking from general experience of what I'd generally get from slow speed ( ISO 125 and lower ) , fine grain film and such. Your results will vary of course, but medium format being as big as it is is quite easy to scan on a flatbed scanner and get at minimum what you'd expect from a good digital camera or a dedicated 35mm scanner.
    -Karl Blessing
    Karl Blessing.com
    The Bokeh
    Color Film always existed. It's just the world was always black and white till recently.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    98
    My first serious MF camera was a Yashica 124G, which I loved; it's since been eclipsed by my 6x6 SLR and my Fuji rangefinder kit, but was a dandy little thing starting out.

    Holgas are not like other MF cameras. If you want a Holga, you'll probably know it.

    I have a 6x9 folder, but I'm not very fond of it. It's very difficult to hold steady, I've found, largely due to very primitive ergonomics. The Fuji G690 kit I have now is considerably easier to hold steady even though it weighs almost five times as much. But they're not cheap.

    All in all, I suggest a TLR. Find a cheap one with a Tessar; the Yashicas aren't bad.

  10. #20
    eubielicious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Conicavel, Moray, Scotland
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    115
    Images
    1
    Personally, I'd go for the Zeiss Ikon (cheap on ebay - my current one cost the princely sum of £8!), I have had two Nettars and both have produced some half-decent pics, although the first had a bit of a light leak which showed on some images. The other one to go for IMO is a Rolleicord, the later ones with the Xenar taking lens are meant to be the best but I had an earlier Rolleicord III with a Tessar lens and it was fab (cost me £28 which I guess is about $50). I got rid of it before moving house and have regretted it since.

    Euan

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin