Gary, your Simple Minds shot is one of the best images I've seen all year, beautiful and so atmospheric.

Agree completely, the Ross Sea party section at the back covers the likely expedition recorded in these photos.

As to digital storage, spinning hardrives aren't safe (they can and do fail without warning), you need a RAID array for any kind of redundancy if you want to use them. Solid state drives might be an answer though.

My experiments with CDs/DVDs haven't been great - you must verify the write (many don't bother and lose the lot).

I keep the images on the original SD cards (I feel the safest/simplest/cost-effective compromise), although transferring them to a good Compact Flash card might be better.

The 'Cloud' is an option (as long as you accept the T's & C's may change at a later date) - I'd look for a paid for service rather than something that's 'free' though. But you need a lot of bandwidth/data allowances to upload the contents from a 16Gb SD card.

The complications of archiving digital files and keeping the formats readable have started to drive me back to film (which can be scanned anyway).

Hi, Velvia delivers vivid colours which can be a problem if you underexpose it (many people suggest setting ISO 40 for this reason). If I'm shooting on auto with stepless shutter speeds I'll set it at ISO 40 and watch my metering carefully. If I'm restricted to full stop shutter speeds, I usually set my hand-held meter to 50 and use it as a guide (it reads to 1/10th of a stop anyway). I generally prefer Provia 100 in 120 though for the extra speed with slower medium format lenses.

When bracketing transparencies, I usually do 1/2 stops rather than 1/3 stops and usually only in one direction (most of the time I know whether I need to err on under or over exposure).

Please share your results.

John.

I use filters on most of my lenses. Primarily to stop me having to clean the front elements (and risk scratching them in the process) more often. I'm more concerned about finger prints or marks than impact damage. I've never tested the IQ with verses without - there are so many more important basic things you need to worry about before worrying about the filter. Obviously if you are having problems you should remove them and investigate.

My exceptions are lenses that can't take filters (fisheyes) or my large diameter medium format lenses where decent filters would be prohibitively expensive (an 82mm would in some cases cost as much as the [used] lens that's already had 20yrs of abuse by others).

However, there is a correct use for UV filters, they allow you to cut through haze a bit better, useful in aerial photography.

John.

I've tentatively signed up for this:link 52 project (one roll of film every week). My plan is to try and shoot medium format (10-15 images per roll) but I may look for some 24 exp. rolls of 35mm (I usually have at least a compact with me most of the time).

Thanks for the comments. Given the conditions I was really surprised to get what I got with an untested camera.

MattyH - I use Peak Imaging for the dev & scan link. I use their 'CD Image 120' service (from their downloadable order form), £8 plus P&P per roll. The scans vary in resolution depending on format, I usually end up with approx. 1500 x 1200 from 6x7 which is enough for web use. For these shots I only re-sized the scans and added the border etc.

The cameras are a real gem to use, but you have to be patient with them (many are 40yr old pro workhorses). There are a few niggly little things that you need to look out for both when buying and when shooting - I mean to post my experiences in the next few days. The first camera was bought from a dealer and quite good. The second off ebay (used for these shots) has been a bit more temperamental (it needed some persuading to get the metering to work and then only in stop-down mode).

Still learning how best to use it, but happy to answer any questions from my limited experience.

John.

Quick update, I have now acquired an SMC Pentax-6x7 45mm f/4. The only results I've had back so far have been quick test shots but it looks a superb lens.

Having bought a 6x7(MU) to go with my 67, I needed to give it a test. Although the weather wasn't playing ball and the early nights were getting in the way, the need shoot a test roll became pressing. Having loaded some Provia 100 during the day (and being delayed by rain), I finally managed to get out quite late. The light was beautiful but dim and fading fast. I was using my 75mm f/4.5 lens (a bit slow for the conditions but it's a good one) and these shots were handheld from 1/60th upwards.

The film was processed and scanned commercially, as expected, the scans simply don't do the original transparencies justice:



River Ribble Pylons #1 by John Halliwell, on Flickr



River Ribble Pylons #2 by John Halliwell, on Flickr



River Ribble Pylons #3 by John Halliwell, on Flickr

John.

I prefer the original to the mono version. The only other suggestion I'd have would be to crop the left & bottom slightly so the left-most block was similarly tight in the bottom-left corner as the right-most block is at the top-right corner. This would crop out the end of the loose rope - which I find a tad distracting.

Otherwise it's a good striking shot.

John.

Smeggy, have you actually used a K-3? Just asking as your very comprehensive sig. gear list omits the K-3 and the Sigma 70mm lens used in the comparisons. Personally, I don't care for 'secondhand' opinions (or even firsthand ones) preferring to make up my own mind. Everybody (read organisation) has their own agenda, I don't let it colour my judgement.