guyfawkes

guyfawkes

Lives in Birmingham, UK
Works as a Retired.
Joined on Feb 20, 2012

Comments

Total: 457, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Jay A: Nice idea but it honestly makes me wonder why, if Nikon feels that people have a need to copy slides or negatives, have they not supported their own film scanners for years.

Thanks. In my ignorance I didn't think it would be difficult, but it seems not. All the more difficult to comprehend when Ed Hamrick can create drivers with Vuescan for lots of scanners no longer supported by their manufacturers.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 14:51 UTC
In reply to:

Jay A: Nice idea but it honestly makes me wonder why, if Nikon feels that people have a need to copy slides or negatives, have they not supported their own film scanners for years.

But how much work is really required simply to update a driver? In the majority of cases, this is all that prevents older scanners from working with modern operating systems.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 13:10 UTC
In reply to:

rsf3127: So easy to DIY. Why paying?

Whilst some would indeed rely on their normal camera lens, those that used this method a lot would use their camera lens on a reverse mount for best performance. Not the equal of a "modern" macro for sure, but it did demonstrate that a macro lens wasn't even a necessity. Remember, Nikon wants to sell its 60mm macro, but the thinking photographer knows ways round this!

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 13:03 UTC
In reply to:

guyfawkes: Pedantic, I know, but the Nikon doesn't scan a slide or negative. It simply takes a snapshot.

Sort of. But it can still only do 35mm. :D) Now if only they could get a modern-day scanner to zip along at 1/1000 sec per frame!

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 12:38 UTC
In reply to:

mahonj: Just get an Epson 4490 or better if you want to scan slides.
They are two very different beasts.

@wolfoid. There are flatbeds and there are flatbeds. One of the best was the old and versatile Canon 9950F, c. 2004/05, which does 35mm (30 negs at a time) up to 5x4. Yes, on roll film and 5x4 results can be stunning, especially in b/w. But what will come as a surprise to most, is that its performance with 35mm isn't utter crap, which I do know is a preconception of many when discussing flatbed v dedicated film scanners.

Given how old these units now are, I'm willing to bet not many today have seen any results from one. No, not up to Minolta 5400 or top Nikon Coolscan quality (what units are?) but I don't have to worry about obsolete SCSI connections or Firewire, or not running on any recent MS platform, as the 9950F will run on anything up to and including W7 without the need for horrible Vuescan. And, yes, I tried it.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 12:33 UTC
In reply to:

Fujica: Nice feature, but I would have thought that most people by now would have already digitised their film negatives.

Nikon could do a smart move to give this feature in upcoming firmware updates. However I think that Nikon wants you to buy a new camera instead if you 'want' this functionality.

They do not seem to understand the power of 'Kaizen'.

@ PAntunes. Will it be faster? You and I both use film scanners (I've posted elsewhere here on this) and the initial capture will certainly be faster with the Nikon. But how much faster, overall, taking into account post processing which I'm sure anyone with an interest in getting the best image capture will do, may even things up somewhat. As I've already posted, the Nikon won't be able to deal with dust or physical damage to the emulsion, or even defects in the emulsion itself and which show up as white spots at 100%.

So, whilst initial scans may take several minutes depending upon the settings chosen for correction, it may be more problematic and time consuming removing them later in PP. And my two scanners, a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II and my Canon 9950F can selectively crop at the scanning stage, something most film scanners can do.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 12:10 UTC

Pedantic, I know, but the Nikon doesn't scan a slide or negative. It simply takes a snapshot.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 09:13 UTC as 25th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

sharkcookie: Yeah and you get every dust particle at 46 mp resolution. Scanning film or slides is not as easy as this little adapter. Nikon actually made some excellent scanners that have an infrared light and detector that looks for dust and automatically removes it. Works brilliantly. Without that feature, you get a lot of dust on it, no matter how much time you spend cleaning the negative or slide beforehand.

@rfsIII. But dust isn't the only issue, scratched emulsion or other film damage can mostly (depending upon how bad it is) be removed during the scan as well. When I look at a straight scan from my Minolta film scanner, Dimage Scan Elite II, about 2001 vintage and just 2820 dpi, I am amazed at just how much detritus the scan reveals at 100% on screen. I am really impressed with just how useful the dust, scratch and grain reducer tools are. I can tell you now, simply looking at the slide/neg you won't see any of these defects with the naked eye.

So no matter how easy the initial capture may be with the Nikon, if it can't address all of the issues that those who regularly scan via scanners know only too well, there is still going to be a fair amount of time spent in PP.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 09:04 UTC
In reply to:

rsf3127: So easy to DIY. Why paying?

If one can do without the in-camera conversion for negatives, why not simply get hold of an old bellows unit + slide/negative holder? Many of these are relatively inexpensive, and using a Sony E mount camera, it isn't necessary to be specific about what camera the bellows were intended for because there is a 100% chance you can find a cheap adapter.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 08:55 UTC
In reply to:

Michael Uschold: Does anyone know of an adapter of this sort that can be used on a Sony NEX 6 camera? Would a 1-1 macro work, or would I need more magnification, given it is a cropped APS-C sensor.

I want to scan many 100s of slides; most are for memories and do not need great quality, so this will be way faster than most or all scanners. Nothing to do but pop the slide in, press the shutter button, put the next slide in, repeat. Takes a few seconds per image.

1:1 macro won't work, if you want the whole slide/negative, due to the APS-C sensor which will "crop" the resultant 1:1 FF image. But good if you want to sort of zoom into part of the image, fine. So anything around 1:2 or less should work well.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 08:46 UTC
In reply to:

Fujica: Nice feature, but I would have thought that most people by now would have already digitised their film negatives.

Nikon could do a smart move to give this feature in upcoming firmware updates. However I think that Nikon wants you to buy a new camera instead if you 'want' this functionality.

They do not seem to understand the power of 'Kaizen'.

And not only a new camera, this one @ £3,500 in the UK, but they'd also like to sell you their "recommended" 60mm macro lens for another £480 on top of this digitiser adapter. No UK price at present, but if it is $150 US, then reckon on £150. So for around £630, just how many negs/slides do you still have to copy?

But it is certainly going to be far faster in operation, and more convenient, than a conventional film scanner, and the best of these such as the top end Nikon Coolscan and Minolta 5400 Mk II are not exactly cheap themselves. If this Nikon can match or even better these scanners, perhaps it won't be a bad investment at all. However, I do wonder if the IQ is limited by the source neg and this 850's resolution is far more than needed.

I'd be interested in the user reviews when they come out, though, just out of curiosity as I don't have any Nikon dslr.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 08:37 UTC
In reply to:

Rick Knepper: My first reaction to this news was why would any company buy 45% of Leica? Then I read the entire news report: "Zeiss is potentially interested in Leica Camera, but would only agree to a deal if it was able to secure a majority stake..."

Good point. Buying a stake in a company may be good for investment returns, but why would an established optical company such as Zeiss consider buying almost half of Leica when the Kaufmann family can override anything Zeiss wanted to do? Better for Zeiss to keep the money and concentrate on its own business, surely?

Link | Posted on Aug 24, 2017 at 08:38 UTC
In reply to:

beckmarc: I hope it will be M42 mount or LTM if it is a rangefinder style camera.
Now we also need a digital Kiev IIa.
Can Zeiss etc sue for copyright now the Soviet union has dissolved? Probably out of copyright as the USSR "stole" the Zeiss designs in 1945 as war reparations.

"I even heard from collectors that you could find swastika stamps on some parts inside some very early Zorki copies, because they didn't have time to remove it from German-made presses."

I find this interesting as I've never come across this comment before, even though I have many books on Leica cameras. Given the number of pre-war and even war time Leica cameras made for the domestic market, it is odd, don't you think, that this allegation seems not to be generally known? Still, it is interesting if true. Could this be a twist on faking Leicas?

Link | Posted on Aug 23, 2017 at 09:35 UTC
In reply to:

Bolshevik: Just for information.
World first SLR was designed and produced in Soviet Russia in 1934
https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%82_(%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82)
So who knows...but I'm doubt.
After all, it's no more Soviet Russia, so, as my son says "Factories are standing, but every other is a photographer"

But the Sport was only in prototype form, going on general release in 1937. Thus the accolade goes to the Kine Exakta which beat it to market in 1936. This is, I understand, the generally accepted view of the first 35mm slr.

@Bolshevik: The Exakta VP did use a standard and available film - 127. Exakta delivers, to use your own words.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 22:09 UTC
In reply to:

agnost: I worked in a camera shop in the mid 1970s and Zenit had the unenviable distinction of being the most unreliable brand we sold. (Closely followed by Miranda cameras.) Most would break within a few weeks of sale and it wasn't uncommon for cameras to be DOA. It didn't take long for the shop to discontinue selling them. I hope the engineering and quality control of this new model will put the brand's checkered reputation to rest, but I'm not holding my breath.

Personal experience with Russian cameras more than likely depends upon where you live. Here in the UK, Russian cameras had a reputation for ruggedness, even if a bit rough around the edges, so to speak, and very good value for money, especially in view of the general quality of the Russian optics of the day. This wasn't by chance.

T&OE realised that they had to get the UK dealers on board most of whom would be small independent shops, and if returns were high due to poor QC, confidence in the cameras (and the other optical equipment they imported such as binoculars, microscopes and enlargers) would be severely dented and dealers would cease to stock the gear.

Thus the official importer, Technical & Optical Equipment Ltd. backed up the cameras with a full repair and service facility, and every camera was subjected to a full pre-distribution check/adjustment before being sent out to dealers.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 21:48 UTC
In reply to:

beckmarc: I hope it will be M42 mount or LTM if it is a rangefinder style camera.
Now we also need a digital Kiev IIa.
Can Zeiss etc sue for copyright now the Soviet union has dissolved? Probably out of copyright as the USSR "stole" the Zeiss designs in 1945 as war reparations.

@krassphoto. "That's how Feds and Zorkis were "born". True for Zorki (and of course Kiev with their Contax II and III copies) who started manufacturing Leica copies in 1947, but not true for Fed, who were producing Leica based copies from around 1934.

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 21:25 UTC
In reply to:

String: The good news; It has an electronic viewfinder
The bad news; It uses tubes

:D

Yes, but won't this then produce a nice warm analogue film-like image without recourse to digital manipulation? :D)

Link | Posted on Aug 22, 2017 at 19:58 UTC
In reply to:

camera joe: How was it packed? What did the case look like?

And why no lens cap? I'm sure this would have been more robust than the filter.

Link | Posted on Aug 20, 2017 at 10:47 UTC
On article Flip to flop: the pocket camcorder flash in the pan (49 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tom K.: If I ever heard of it, it didn't make an impression. I have no recollection of this thing. It may be that it was a phenomenon that I completely missed, or it may be that it wasn't as widespread as you seem to think it was.

A quartet of ostriches comes to mind. :D)

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 16:24 UTC
In reply to:

LiangMing: Come on, it just say if you trade in your old camera, you get what ever the trade-in value from the vendor, PLUS $300 or $500 from Sony when you buy the Sony camera at the same time.

The only way anyone has of assessing your offer at B&H is whether their $700 trade-in value is par for the course or not.

Link | Posted on Aug 18, 2017 at 15:35 UTC
Total: 457, showing: 21 – 40
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »