The split image might be more accurate, but only if your eye is centred.

I would just use one method though, whichever you find most comfortable.

I think I would take a different choice and eliminate the window frame altogether.

The it does indeed become impressionistic.

That depends upon the type of film and the type of digital camera - it's rapidly becoming no longer true.

Slide film has a range of about 5 stops, so if you use the same technique for metering with your DSLR you will be spot on. Meter so the highlights are not burnt out and let the shadows take care of themselves.

Colour negative film has about 7 stops, but some digital cameras now equal or exceed this.

Black and white film depends on the speed - very slow film needs more accurate exposure than fast film, but you can vary development as well so this is quite a versatile medium.

You can exceed the possibilities of this in digital by using HDR techniques. Then you can have a dynamic range far exceeding that of film.

The viewfinder optics result in the focusing screen being effectively about 1 metre away from your eye. If you need glasses for reading or for your computer screen, try using these when looking through the viewfinder and you may find that suddenly it becomes very easy to focus.

There are eyepiece adjustment lenses available as well.

As regards focusing I usually just turn the focusing ring until the image looks sharpest in the viewfinder. The central focusing aids are the split image and the microprism collar.

The split image - just find a sharp line and focus until the line becomes one and is not displaced.

The microrism collar will shimmer until focus is achieved. When the shimmering stops you are in focus.

The difficulty arises when all three methods give you different focus points, but you won't be far out.

Yes it is possible, using medium format film or larger and high-end scanners. Or indeed the sort of drum scanning that (used to be?) done for magazines.

However, the very nature of the film structure from 35mm slides doesn't really give the quality of a top class digital file, but then it is different. Kodachrome is notoriuously difficult to scan well - not really suitable when it comes down to it.

Velvia looks pretty good though!

I agree with that.

We don't know yet if she's going to stick with bird photography so this lens will be to see how it goes. If she gets serious then you know which lenses I'll be looking for second hand.

Sorry to shock you Dan!

A dedicated negative/slide scanner is the best method. Many flat beds also scan slides.

Every method is very time consuming.

Sue would like a longer lens so I guess it will need to be 400mm or longer. AF or MF, open mind on manufacturer, anything on offer out there?

I found this one on Amazon.co.uk, available from 47th Street Photo of New York for just under £250.00

A manual focus 85mm f1.4 is a pretty tempting prospect. Looks as though this is the same as the vivitar branded lens that was recently ammounced.

Has anyone tried one of these yet?