Thanks John!

I find it very interesting to read your comments on my images. With number two I was laying on the ground, trying to capture a different perspective on a very mundane subject. These boathouses are very common all along the Norwegian coast, and also in the fjords, and are favoured photo motives. I fully understand your objections to number four, but this was also a choice I made when taking the photo. The aim was to include the boathouse, the mountainrange, and the open fjord going into the horizon. It could have been done differently, but this was how I wanted it.

I believe most medium format shooters will be perfectly content with an Epson V700/750 scanner. The differences between these Epsons and a drumscanner is most often not noticable except when one wants to print very large. I cannot image wanting to print larger than A3+ for photos to hang on my walls, and for scanning with this quality the Epson will do fine. I have read somewhere that an Epson V700/750 scan of medium format equals at least what you get with the best "fullframe" digital DSLRs (between 30-40mp). The only problem I have encountered so far is with dark Velvia 50, the Epson does not have a strong enough light source to blast through the transparency shadows. If I ever end up with a shot I want to print very large, I would send it off to Tim Parkin for a drum scan (cheapdrummscaning.com). He really has very good prices for drumscanning. I use my Epson V750 on an ancient Mac Mini (1,87 GHZ, 4mb RAM). The Epson works well with even modestly powered PCs and Macs. When scanning medium format at 2400ppi I end up with 230mb tiff files, and my Mac is able to deal with this file size when doing PP in Apple Aperture 3. For ultimate quality on the Epson V700/750 many advice that you scan at the 6400ppi setting, then downsize the file by 50%. This improves noise and general image quality. A medium format scan at 6400ppi results in a 1,3gb file, and with this file size my Mac struggles. The true resolution of the Epson V700/750 is claimed to be around roughly 2300-2600 ppi. By scanning at the 2400ppi setting on the Epson, one is quite close to max resolution, so this is my default setting. And with this setting my Mac is powerful enough.

The 55-100 is a beautiful zoom, and perfect for landscape. It is very sharp and has aperture settings from f4.5 to f32. I bought mine mainly because I admired Ian Cameron's work, and I know that he uses this zoom for most of his photography. The only drawback is that it has a 95mm filter ring and that it is VERY heavy. One really needs a sherpa for carrying the Pentax 67ii + 55-100mm zoom around in the mountains It is also less convenient to use the Pentax 67ii hand held when the zoom is attached. So most of the time I have ended up bringing only my primes. But for the ultimate image quality and flexibility (zoom) the 55-100 is a magnificent beast.

Bjørn

Great shot! I have never seen that species around here. Thanks for sharing.

Bjørn

Since you are a very outspoken man Smeggy, I dare to speak my mind. Your images from Norway are lovely, especially the last three. The scans, on the the other hand, are mostly terrible. The noise and colour blotches in most shadow areas are really ruining these shots, like for instance in the darkest part of the river in the second image. What did you use to scan these images? A decent flatbed like the Epson V700/750 easily does better than this.

Bjørn

I need to add that the Epson V700/750s are especially well suited for black and white scanning, probably producing equal results to the Nikon Coolscan 8000/9000. So for black and white aficianados, a medium format camera, some Ilford film and an Epson V700/750 can produce results comparable to the Leica Monochrome at a fraction of the cost. This is a common notion amongst photographers at apug.org and rangefinderforums.com, who have experience with the Leica and with B&W film (and are not Leica die-hards)

Bjørn

Thank you Nigel! Glad you like my photos.

Based on what other film users write, and my own experience, digitalization (scanning) of film is the bottleneck for the film users who want to bring their film images onto a computer and maybe also print them. It is still possible to purchase a wide range of films, there are many labs that develop films, but there are no real widespread solutions for high quality scanning. By high quality I refer to scanning that captures most of the information that can be found on the film negative or transparency. Film users who are really devoted to film may know about and use Tim Parkin's drum scanning (cheapdrumscanning.com), where you end up with files that surpass many digital cameras, depending on what filmtype you use: 35mm, medium format, large format, etc. So, it is acknowledged by most film shooters that scanning is the most problematic area in the whole film experience.

One solution to this is to scan yourself. Scanning film can be quite time consuming and cumbersome. But when I read about how much time many RAW shooters spend in front of their computers, scanning may in fact be less time consuming. ( When purchasing my Epson V750 scanner, I read about scanners and scanning on the net for at least a year, and came to the concluson that I would prefer to have a new scanner with a warranty, than a second hand Nikon Coolscan 8000/9000, which are possibly better also with medium format, but cost twice as much as a new Epson, and are mostly non-repairable. All in all I am very satisfied with my Epson. The main thing is to keep the film flat, and aim at a neutral scan. I use Epson scan, turn off sharpening and other auto-options. It is very important to make sure that the scan does not clip the image on either side of the histogram. So my scans look very much like a digital RAW file. I then import the scan into Apple Aperture 3, where I fine adjust white balance, apply curves for contrast, and the at the end apply Apple's "edge sharpening". The scan from the Epson can take a lot of sharpening before the image starts becoming edgy and strange. If one spends some time with the Epson one can get results that are very good, especially with medium format and larger film sizes. Films like Kodak Porta 400 scan especially well on the Epson flatbed, I doubt one would get a better result with a dedicated film scanner (Coolscan 9000). Fuji Velvia 50, on the hand, is quite problematic, only well exposed/bright transperencies scan well. Dark/underexposed Velvia 50 is mostly non success. Having said this, dark Velvia 50 is difficult to scan even on the best Hasselblad Imacons and drum scanners.

Well Nigel, here is a rather long answer to your question, I hope it makes sense

Bjørn

A nice set. My favourite is no. 3, love that sinister expression

Bjørn

The first one is especially nice, and I also like no. 3.

Bjørn

Wonderful set!

Bjørn

+1

I especially like the last image in the first set, the dog's expression is great!

Regards
Bjørn

Thank you both!


Good idea! The 645n needs some attention, feed it some film and go shooting

Bjørn