Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,916   Posts: 1,521,894   Online: 1083
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 41
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South Norfolk, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,864
    Images
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    Tom

    I tested Hasselblad lenses from CF onwards, and they are all very good and about the same, peaking around 60 lp/mm with Tmax-100, developed in D76 1+1, but the Mamiya-6 lenses are clearly a step above with a maximum of 90 lp/mm. Admittedly, it needs 16x20-inch prints to appreciate the difference. It must be easier to correct rangefinder lenses than SLR lenses, especially wide-angle.
    Although I've not done much work with it, I have found the 45mm lens on the Bronica RF645 impressive in terms of both sharpness and resolution.

    On your developer choice, if I recall correctly, Kodak claims a 10% improvement for XTOL over D-76 in terms of speed, resolution, and sharpness, what would your comment be?

    Tom

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    Tom

    I tested Hasselblad lenses from CF onwards, and they are all very good and about the same, peaking around 60 lp/mm with Tmax-100, developed in D76 1+1, but the Mamiya-6 lenses are clearly a step above with a maximum of 90 lp/mm. Admittedly, it needs 16x20-inch prints to appreciate the difference. It must be easier to correct rangefinder lenses than SLR lenses, especially wide-angle.
    The 75mm Heliar lens on the Bessa III 667 is at least as good as the 80mm Mamiya lens. If you are looking for maximum portability, can live with just one lens, and can stand the sticker price this is a camera to consider.

    Sandy King

  3. #23
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    the villages .centralflorida,USA and Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,368
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Kershaw View Post
    ...On your developer choice, if I recall correctly, Kodak claims a 10% improvement for XTOL over D-76 in terms of speed, resolution, and sharpness, what would your comment be?

    Tom
    Tom

    I had some disappointing results early on with Xtol (thin negatives) and did not try it since. Now, I want to be prepared to mix my own, and this is a lot simpler with D76 than with Xtol. Anyway, speed, resolution, sharpness and grain is a give-and-take between developers. I don't think any developer is going to give you an improvement in all areas, and I have no reason to leave D76, because with medium or large-format it gives me all I want.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Kershaw View Post

    On your developer choice, if I recall correctly, Kodak claims a 10% improvement for XTOL over D-76 in terms of speed, resolution, and sharpness, what would your comment be?

    Tom

    In my tests of Xtol compared to D-76 I did see an increase in effective film speed. I did not see any difference in either resolution or in sharpness.

    Resolution is primarily determined by film (except some tanning developers increase resolution by about 10-15%) and sharpness is more a factor of developer dilution and type of agitation than developer itself.

    Basically, except for the increase in film speed Xtol left me yawning and the whole thing IMO was much more about Kodak marketing a "safe and green" developer than about image quality itself.

    Sandy King
    Last edited by sanking; 12-26-2009 at 01:34 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #25
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,195
    Images
    148
    It's not a thread about D-76 & Xtol but Sandy if you'd tested Tmax in D76 and Xtol in a 35mm camera, with high level lenses then there's an unmistakeable difference in sharpness & resolution between the two.

    Ian

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    It's not a thread about D-76 & Xtol but Sandy if you'd tested Tmax in D76 and Xtol in a 35mm camera, with high level lenses then there's an unmistakeable difference in sharpness & resolution between the two.

    Ian
    Ian,

    Well, I was just answering a question, not attempting to hijack the thread.

    But, I stand completely by my statement that sharpness is determined more by developer dilution and type of agitation than by the developer itself. As for resolution, I compared D76 and Xtol with a high resolution chrome on glass target several years ago, and the tests took a lot of time and were done to the best of my ability in an effort to be fair and objective. I compared Xtol with D76, and also included PMK and Pyrocat-HD. I also tested four different films, two traditional emulsions films and two T-grain emulsions.

    My results showed virtually the same resolution with all four films comparing D76 1:1 and Xtol 1:2. Pyrocat and PMK both gave an increase of about 10-15% in resolution compared to D76 and Xtol.

    What was not mentioned earlier is grain with Xtol is finer than with D76 and this may be what makes it appear sharper in 35mm work.

    Sandy
    Last edited by sanking; 12-26-2009 at 03:24 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  7. #27
    Dave Pritchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    266
    I have a Pentacon Six, a Kiev 6C (okay 6S), and a Salyut-S. They are appropriate for the lightweight arts photography I am doing now. The lenses are nice. Some care is needed with the bodies, to cock the shutter before whatever. Overall, the cost is low, and the images are nice.

    Everyone here will tell you that the only cameras worth having are the very best of the best. Well, it depends on your situation. If you are a professional, you would not be asking this question anyway.

    If the normal lens set-up on the Yashica is not quite flexible enough, you are looking for lenses. I'd recommend looking first at the lenses you need for your intended uses. The Pentacon Six (and Kiev 60) mount lenses are a good value.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Midlands, UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    106
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Pritchard View Post
    I have a Pentacon Six, a Kiev 6C (okay 6S), and a Salyut-S. They are appropriate for the lightweight arts photography I am doing now. The lenses are nice. Some care is needed with the bodies, to cock the shutter before whatever. Overall, the cost is low, and the images are nice.

    Everyone here will tell you that the only cameras worth having are the very best of the best. Well, it depends on your situation. If you are a professional, you would not be asking this question anyway.

    If the normal lens set-up on the Yashica is not quite flexible enough, you are looking for lenses. I'd recommend looking first at the lenses you need for your intended uses. The Pentacon Six (and Kiev 60) mount lenses are a good value.
    Yeah that was my thinking, lens wise I must say the famous fisheye appeals but I think overall mainly on the wider side of 80mm for most things I do. Possibly something a little longer should I do any portrait work too.

    I think I'll go for the new option, while the Bronica would serve me well getting the lenses could be a lottery ( i.e. waiting for them to be available ).

    Arax and Hartblei seem to do a decent job and not as if I'm likely to wear them out.

    Guess the next question is do I NEED MLU. While I love the look of the 88 and the interchangeable backs are a nice to have, going for a 60 makes more sense from a reliability point of view.

    http://www.araxfoto.com/cameras/arax-60mlu/ £220ish

    http://www.hartblei.com/cameras/kiev-60.htm
    No MLU - about £120
    MLU (no return button) £150
    MLU (no return button) £165

    All prices approxx

    Kits seem to include same stuff ( except for a nice arax bag ) so not sure which to go for.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South Norfolk, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,864
    Images
    62
    Katie,

    Bronica kit is generally available. See www.ffordes.co.uk

    Tom

  10. #30
    mrred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    653
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Katier View Post
    Guess the next question is do I NEED MLU. While I love the look of the 88 and the interchangeable backs are a nice to have, going for a 60 makes more sense from a reliability point of view.
    Well, I bough a kit of a 88CM, 2x 6x6 120 backs, 1 prism, 1 waist viewfinder and an 80mm (pent 6) lens. Great! Then I bought my first "other lens" and realized upon arrival, that it was for the old mount. I looked around the "bay" and picked up an older Kiev 88 box for less than $100. Later I got brave and picked up a 4x5 120 back.

    Modular is the way to go, in making your money truly stretch. I now can look for the best lens and have a body to match it. I have found them most reliable and the only issues I have had to date was me. No regrets.

    I did borrow a Hassy 500c before I bought the kiev, to help me make up my mind. There were two main factors for me choosing the Kiev. One was a newer production (A hassy of the same generation would cost 4k+). This would impact parts/repair in the future. Getting a hassy of comparable price (1950-1970) would mean parts supply would dwindle sooner. I intend to shoot film for a very long time. The second was the non-standard filter mount. The thought of buying more filters "just because" it was a hassy turns me off.

    A friend of mine has a Mamiya MF. It doesn't give him decent photos because he can't shoot. It's your eye that counts.

Page 3 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