The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

More and more film fun with something other than a Leica M

MartinN

Well-known member
Not happy with the medium format scans from this lab. I need to buy a scanner.
Why ? Do you want more resolution or contrast ? These things can of course be optimized with a scanner.

I'm extremely happy with my Plustek OpticFilm 120 MF Scanner. However for 'some' images I have to use
Silverfast instead of Vuescan. That's because SF is the only program tha can optimize the space between
frames, and that is required for my Mamiya 645AF that takes 16 on 120.

Besides scanning, I always adjust my scans in Adobe Lightroom for optimum results.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Why ? Do you want more resolution or contrast ? These things can of course be optimized with a scanner.

I'm extremely happy with my Plustek OpticFilm 120 MF Scanner. However for 'some' images I have to use
Silverfast instead of Vuescan. That's because SF is the only program tha can optimize the space between
frames, and that is required for my Mamiya 645AF that takes 16 on 120.

Besides scanning, I always adjust my scans in Adobe Lightroom for optimum results.
Both... resolution and contrast. There's also generally little information in the scanned files.

I've heard all kinds of stories about the Plustek 120, positive and negative. I'm tempted, but it's not cheap. I'm very comfortable with Silverfast though, since that is what I use with the Plustek 35mm scanner.

I'll probably buy a 645 AF or AFD later. I've heard stories about film flatness that aren't too uplifting though, that the second frame after the camera has rested for a while will is often out of focus due to a film flatness problem. Have you experienced that?
 

MartinN

Well-known member
I'll probably buy a 645 AF or AFD later. I've heard stories about film flatness that aren't too uplifting though, that the second frame after the camera has rested for a while will is often out of focus due to a film flatness problem. Have you experienced that?
It's really a good camera, the Mamiya 645AF for handheld work. When absolute image quality is needed I prefer the Fuji (You know).
No I have not printed 645AF color or BW negatives really large, but A3 prints that are easy to accomodate on walls are fine. I have not tried to look for film flatness problems, and I am not especially savvy with film so I try to finish one roll a day when I use this camera.

In my opionon there was a foxhunt on the web against the Plustek OF120 that serously damaged the opinons about it. I think it's the only affordable scanning solution for MF when not talking Hasselblad FlexTight and old Nikon9000 or those enourmous drum scanners.
 

MartinN

Well-known member
The biggest problem I have with almost ANY modern camera and also with the 645AF is that when I wear glasses and photograph in bright sunlight I get light leaks and stray light that makes seeing the damn small LED markings inside the viewfinder almost impossible. The 645 AF is abit better than average, in that it beeps when In Focus. Very convenient.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Still on my first couple of rolls with the Mamiya. Many things to learn, like getting used to focusing quickly. Photo of my lunch a few weeks ago. Easier with a phone, more fun on film :)

Mamiya 645 Pro with 80mm f/1.9 and HP5

 

jdphoto

Well-known member
Happy Holidays To All!

All images taken with the Pentax 645Nii w/105mm f2.4/ 45mm f4 & Fuji 400H
 
Last edited:

jdphoto

Well-known member
Jorgen,
I love the Mamiya 1.9 photos. I've read great things about that lens. Have you noticed a bias towards green tint with Fuji color film? I thought it might be the rendering of the lens, but my Pentax 67 lenses also show the green tint, which is something I kind of like. I find that Fuji 400 H seems to like softer, overcast shadow. I'll try Portra 400 and look for the warmer tones of that film. Thanks for all the great photos.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Jorgen,
I love the Mamiya 1.9 photos. I've read great things about that lens. Have you noticed a bias towards green tint with Fuji color film? I thought it might be the rendering of the lens, but my Pentax 67 lenses also show the green tint, which is something I kind of like. I find that Fuji 400 H seems to like softer, overcast shadow. I'll try Portra 400 and look for the warmer tones of that film. Thanks for all the great photos.
Yes, there's a green tint, and I much prefer Portra, not only because of Portra's more yellowish tint, but also because of the way Portra 160 as well as 400 render detail.
 

chrism

Well-known member
Chamonix 10x8, Schneider-Kreuznach Symmar-S 360mm/f6.8 @ f6.8, 1/8 second, one Impact strobe, Galaxy Hyperspeed paper at ISO 50, pre-flashed though plain printer paper (same exposure as for taking), Ilford MG developer, Epson V850 scan:




Thomas 10x8 by chrism229, on Flickr


Chris
 

Oren Grad

Active member
Chris, that is astonishingly good for a paper negative. Yet another thing to bump up my to-try list - I have an unopened pack of 5x7 Galaxy that has been sitting around since I got it through the Kickstarter campaign. The pre-flash with paper at the time of exposure seems a very practical way of dealing with that problem. Thanks for sharing!
 

chrism

Well-known member
Thank you. I tried it at the claimed speed of 120 and it just wasn't right. I have worked my way down to 50, and I suspect it would be best rated at 25. Better than Ilford MG at ISO 3 at any rate!
I have also tried holding a large yellow gel filter during the exposure to tame contrast, but the pre-flash works much better.

C.
 

Oren Grad

Active member
Thank you. I tried it at the claimed speed of 120 and it just wasn't right. I have worked my way down to 50, and I suspect it would be best rated at 25.
So that I can understand how to interpret those numbers, how are you metering for flash exposures like this?
 
Top