hasselblad Tue, 14 Nov 2000 Volume 1 : Number 1048 In this issue: Re: MF film scanners & 60mm lens Q. Re: MF film scanners Re: MF film scanners & 60mm lens Q. FS/FT: Tele-Tessar 500 mm Scanners... Problems Winder grip for 500C Apcam motor drive for 500C Re: Scanners... Re: MF film scanners ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 09:04:16 -0600 From: Robert Welch To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: MF film scanners & 60mm lens Q. Message-ID: Regarding flatbed scanners for MF, I've had some experience with the Epson 1200U and was not trilled. The problems for me were sharpness and those darn Newton rings. The 1600 may be better, but I'm thinking the best solution might be just on the horizon. It's looking like Agfa and Microtek are introducing some interesting models, each with glassless film holders and dpi ratings of 1200+ with prices starting at $800 (take a look at the new Agfa Arcus 1200, very interesting, and the new Microtek ArtixScan models). It looks to me like the next year will be very promising to us medium format shooters for some consumer grade scanning equipment. Now I have a question for you wedding photographers out there. I've seen a 60mm f/4.0 C lens available and have never heard of it before. It looks a lot like the f/5.6, which is a bit slow for my taste. I currently have a 50mm CF, and an 80mm CT*, but feel a 60mm would be best for isle and reception shots at weddings. I'm interested in getting this 60mm, but unsure if I'd be happy with an older C lens. I could wait and get a CB later when I have the $ and make do for now. This would only be for weddings, where the lesser contrast of a C than a T* might not be such a bad thing, but not having used one I'm not sure. Any opinions on this matter would be appreciated. Thanks, Robert Welch http://www.rwphotography.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 07:04:25 -0800 From: "Peter Klosky" To: , Subject: Re: MF film scanners Message-ID: Nice portrait. The background light helps create a very nice separation = between the woman's hair and the background, which allows the viewer to = focus on her portrait and warm smile. Peter >>> djonsson@uswest.net 11/12/00 07:45PM >>> The file below is a scan of a Hasselblad negative, shot on Delta 400, that = I made on my Epson 1200U scanner with the optional negative scanning attachment. I couldn't be happier with the results I'm getting with this combination. The original scan is several megs in size; the reduction I've posted can't do justice to the detail I can capture. I've had excellent = luck picking out blades of grass in shots around my yard. BTW, the shot was made with a 501CW with 150mm Sonnar, one umbrella to the left of the camera, one for background and one for fill. Used Vivitar 283 and and 285 and I think a Pentax flash, all on peanut slaves. Cleaned up = and cropped with Photoshop. My HP Deskjet 952C produces stunning 8x10s, if I = use the HP photo paper. The subjects are my son and his girlfriend. http://testdocs.dced.state.ut.us/djtest/jen_jer_small.jpg=20 ----- Original Message ----- From: olenberger To: Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 10:26 PM Subject: MF film scanners > I am interested in seeing the quality produced by various medium-format > scanners, and would be most grateful if anyone could sent me an image = file > from their scanner (or refer me to a URL where it is posted). This = would be > for viewing on a monitor only, and I am limited to a 56K modem, so I = would > like a compressed JPEG file of around 50KB. In order to provide some > consistancy in comparison, a full-frame 6cm by 6cm transparency (preferably > Velvia) with a scanned image size of 360 pixels x 360 pixels would be good. > I know that this is not a good scientific test for a hundred = reasons, > but I'm just looking for a rough idea of what quality I can get for posting > photos on the internet. > I am particularly interested in the following scanners: > > Epson 1640SU -- $399 US > HP5370 -- $299 US > UMAX Powerlook III -- around $1100 US bundled with Photoshop 5.5. > > -Fritz Olenberger > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing = list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. > > To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad=20 > Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm= =20 > Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute = Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing = list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, = or affiliates. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/Rem= oteListSummary/Hasselblad=20 Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm=20= Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.htm= l ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:11:48 -0800 From: Mark Rabiner To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: Re: MF film scanners & 60mm lens Q. Message-ID: <3A102EE4.55C8F2E4@rabiner.cncoffice.com> Robert Welch wrote: > > Regarding flatbed scanners for MF, I've had some experience with the > Epson 1200U and was not trilled. The problems for me were sharpness > and those darn Newton rings. The 1600 may be better, but I'm thinking > the best solution might be just on the horizon. It's looking like > Agfa and Microtek are introducing some interesting models, each with > glassless film holders and dpi ratings of 1200+ with prices starting > at $800 (take a look at the new Agfa Arcus 1200, very interesting, > and the new Microtek ArtixScan models). It looks to me like the next > year will be very promising to us medium format shooters for some > consumer grade scanning equipment. > > Now I have a question for you wedding photographers out there. I've > seen a 60mm f/4.0 C lens available and have never heard of it before. > It looks a lot like the f/5.6, which is a bit slow for my taste. I > currently have a 50mm CF, and an 80mm CT*, but feel a 60mm would be > best for isle and reception shots at weddings. I'm interested in > getting this 60mm, but unsure if I'd be happy with an older C lens. I > could wait and get a CB later when I have the $ and make do for now. > This would only be for weddings, where the lesser contrast of a C > than a T* might not be such a bad thing, but not having used one I'm > not sure. Any opinions on this matter would be appreciated. > > Thanks, > Robert Welch The way i view it is if you've worked in 35mm, Bob a 50 is like a 28 but a 60 is like a 35. People are going to be shrunk with a 50/28 in a way they are generally not going to put up with. I only use it for waist up shots in cramped quarters But the 60 you could get much more general full length use out of IMO! mark rabiner :) http://spokenword.to/rabiner/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:01:59 +0100 From: Michael Buchstaller To: hasselblad@kelvin.net Subject: FS/FT: Tele-Tessar 500 mm Message-ID: <33d01tkqnev5eae4vi81mcl9d6qdu8u5o2@4ax.com> Hello HUG, i have this lens for hpurchased 3 years ago and have used it 2 times after that, so i decided to sell it or trade for someting i would use more often. The lens:=20 Hasselblad 500 mm f8 Carl Zeiss Tele-Tessar, Synchro-Compur shutter, distance scale marked in meters and feet, Non-T* Serial: Nr4869737 glass perfect, shutter speeds OK, mechanically smooth working. =46ront anr rear original caps (from cap black with "Hasselblad" sign, back cap grey wigh "=3D=3DV=3D=3D" sign) Leather OK, painting has some scratches, usage marks on tripod mount. =46ocussing ring has 3 movable colored dots (don=B4t know for what they are, they are yellow, red and green). I would like to get DM 2450 for it. But would be also open for a trade. I am currently looking for some studio flashlights with generator. Maybe somebody has something else in stock that they do not want, maybe vintage analog synthesizers ? I would accept an memorymoog or a prohet-5 as well as an Elka Synthex (with value compensation). If interestes, please contact me off-list. If noone wants it, i will put it on ebay in december. -Michael Buchstaller ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:10:44 -0800 From: "RICH" To: Subject: Scanners... Message-ID: <000301c04dbe$91695be0$85b7b7c7@rjiredff> I too am interested in film scanners. Of these three: Epson 1640SU -- $399 US HP5370 -- $299 US UMAX Powerlook III -- around $1100 US What negative/slide sizes can they handle? Are they all three decent? Thanks, Rich ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 15:42:11 -0600 From: Robert I Fleischman To: hasselblad@Kelvin.net Subject: Problems Message-ID: <20001113.154212.-554907.0.RFXMAIL@juno.com> I ran across volume454 of your Hasselblad Forum by way of a search engine. I don't know why the search engine sent me to this one volume. I tried looking for your home page, to begin at the beginning, or find a search, but had no luck. I tried the URL shown at the bottom of volume 454, but this took me to some sort of "Post Office" thing that I couldn't penetrate. I entered my email address took a guess at the other item they were asking for, but I got an error message. I went to Yahoo advanced search and wound up at the "Post Office" thing again, but this time it had a error message, something about a modified form, and i'm supposed to go to the post office and get a new one! I never heard of this on the internet before, so I am stumpted. It reminds me of the problems I had trying to get into the Leica Users group by way of "Majordomo." I went through all the steps, but the forum never showed up, and I don't know what I'm supposed to do. Apparently your site doesn't work like a bulletin board anybody can just look at or contribute to such as the watch forum at Turfbuilders.com. How do I get access to your site? Thanks for your time, Robert Fleischman RFXMAIL@juno.com ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:41:05 -0600 From: "Murray E. Milligan" To: Hasselblad Subject: Winder grip for 500C Message-ID: I'm having a brain fart, what's the name of the 3rd party grip & motor drive for the 500C. They have a url, for the life of me, I can't recall their name? vocatus atque non voWhat's the name of the catus deus adent Murray E. Milligan, Winnipeg, Canada ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 19:01:33 -0600 From: "Murray E. Milligan" To: Hasselblad Subject: Apcam motor drive for 500C Message-ID: My apologies to the group, my brain fart subsided and I located the name of the drive. Has anyone on the list any experience with this drive in terms of long term wear and tear, ease of use, attachment, etc? vocatus atque non vocatus deus adent Murray E. Milligan, Winnipeg, Canada ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:22:17 -0800 From: "olenberger" To: Subject: Re: Scanners... Message-ID: <003d01c04e57$0fbf7220$efa7263f@default> Rich: The Epson will scan up to 4"x5" transparencies, has a resolution of 1600 x 3200 dpi, 42-bit color, and DMax of 3.2. The HP will scan up to 5"x5" transparencies, has a resolution of 1200 x 2400 dpi, 42-bit color, and DMax that is unspecified (I e-mailed HP to get this spec, and they responded that they did not specify DMax, and that other things such as quality of design were more important). The UMAX will scan up to 8.5"x10" transparencies, has a resolution of 1200 x 2400, 42-bit color, and DMax of 3.4. In my research of scanners, the value of DMax, which tells you the maximum density of film the scanner can render before it gives up and calls it black, appears to drive the price. The scale is logrithmic, so there is a lot of difference between 3.0 and 3.4, or so they say. I believe a value of 4.0 is perfect -- or close to it -- although you would have to go to a very expensive drum scanner to approach that. We have all seen the contrast gain that occurs when we make prints from slides, so that is why DMax is important, especially if you have some contrasty slides. I would think color depth (42 bits in all cases) would relate to DMax, but the specs on the various scanners don't seem to bear that out. I think the source of light has more to do with it. All these specs probably don't answer your question "are all three decent?" I personally don't have a feel for the difference between a DMax of 3.0 versus 3.4. To really assess that, you would have to scan the same contrasty slide on all three scanners and look at the difference in the output. The service bureau I have been using has samples output from a Nikon 35mm film scanner, a flatbed scanner, and a drum scanner. And yes, there is a difference. And they charge accordingly. Hope this helps. -Fritz ----- Original Message ----- From: "RICH" To: Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 2:10 PM Subject: Scanners... > I too am interested in film scanners. > > Of these three: > > Epson 1640SU -- $399 US > HP5370 -- $299 US > UMAX Powerlook III -- around $1100 US > > What negative/slide sizes can they handle? Are they all three decent? > > Thanks, > > Rich > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. > > To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:29:05 -0800 From: "olenberger" To: Subject: Re: MF film scanners Message-ID: <005201c04e58$035ba480$efa7263f@default> Well, I must say the Epson scanner did pretty well on that. Thanks for responding. You have a handsome son, and his girlfriend is very pretty. Both photogenic. -Fritz ----- Original Message ----- From: "David & Leigh Ann Jonsson" To: Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 4:45 PM Subject: Re: MF film scanners > The file below is a scan of a Hasselblad negative, shot on Delta 400, that I > made on my Epson 1200U scanner with the optional negative scanning > attachment. I couldn't be happier with the results I'm getting with this > combination. The original scan is several megs in size; the reduction I've > posted can't do justice to the detail I can capture. I've had excellent luck > picking out blades of grass in shots around my yard. > > BTW, the shot was made with a 501CW with 150mm Sonnar, one umbrella to the > left of the camera, one for background and one for fill. Used Vivitar 283 > and and 285 and I think a Pentax flash, all on peanut slaves. Cleaned up and > cropped with Photoshop. My HP Deskjet 952C produces stunning 8x10s, if I use > the HP photo paper. The subjects are my son and his girlfriend. > > http://testdocs.dced.state.ut.us/djtest/jen_jer_small.jpg > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: olenberger > To: > Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 10:26 PM > Subject: MF film scanners > > > > I am interested in seeing the quality produced by various > medium-format > > scanners, and would be most grateful if anyone could sent me an image file > > from their scanner (or refer me to a URL where it is posted). This would > be > > for viewing on a monitor only, and I am limited to a 56K modem, so I would > > like a compressed JPEG file of around 50KB. In order to provide some > > consistancy in comparison, a full-frame 6cm by 6cm transparency > (preferably > > Velvia) with a scanned image size of 360 pixels x 360 pixels would be > good. > > I know that this is not a good scientific test for a hundred reasons, > > but I'm just looking for a rough idea of what quality I can get for > posting > > photos on the internet. > > I am particularly interested in the following scanners: > > > > Epson 1640SU -- $399 US > > HP5370 -- $299 US > > UMAX Powerlook III -- around $1100 US bundled with Photoshop 5.5. > > > > -Fritz Olenberger > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute > Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list > is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or > affiliates. > > > > To change your subscription status, go to: > http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > > Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > > Searchable archives can be found at > http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. > > To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad > Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm > Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html ------------------------------ End of hasselblad V1 #1048 ************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Hasselblad Users Group Listserv is a public service of Absolute Internet, Inc., which is not responsible for its content. This mailing list is in no way affiliated with Victor Hasselblad AB, it's subsidiaries, or affiliates. To change your subscription status, go to: http://mail.kelvin.net/guest/RemoteListSummary/Hasselblad Digest archives are stored at http://www.kelvin.net/hasselblad/hassy.htm Searchable archives can be found at http://www.listquest.com/arts/index.html