Yeah, that's what I meant!!

Easier to do than to remember without a camera in hand, I guess.

The ISO setting only calibrates the meter. If it is stuck at 100 and you wish to use 400 ISO film, meter with 100, then stop down 2 stops-either increase shutter speed from say, 125 to 500, or change aperture from say, 16 to 8. After a while you'll stop worrying about the meter!!

Point taken-especially for older scanners, Vuescan may be the ticket. I enjoyed tinkering with some of the low-level controls, too. I finally gave up when I found that a good part of the time, if I went from color slides to black and white negatives, I'd get a tri-color band that required restarting the scanner to remove.

Aaron

I have this scanner, and have spent a lot of time on it. In fact, I have just done a huge project-not archiving (a mistake, I think) but making a presentation for the family. I have some suggestions, but they may not all be popular.

1) Avoid Vuescan. You'll spend way too much time trying to mess with it, and I never was happy with the results.

2) The only use for the multi-sampling is occasionally it will reduce noise in the shadows-but seldom enough that you're right to skip it. Noise Ninja does a better job, on an as-needed basis.

3) Use 8 bit-save time and disk space. If you are doing heavy post-processing adjustments, you may see an advantage to 16 bit, but few editing programs handle 16 bit.

4) Use sRGB, especially if you use 8 bit images. Extra-especially if you are using a lab/Frontier/Noritsu printing service, as they all use sRGB. Besides, I bet the color in the slides is nowhere near Adobe RGB anyway.

5) Don't do color or lighting adjustments in the scanning program-do it in Photoshop.

6) If I'm going to print, I use 3200 dpi input scanning resolution and ignore the output resolution. I will save the file in TIFF. For a screen only project, they're at about half the resolution, and in JPEG.

7) Specific to this scanner, use the "custom wizard" box-set all your preferences once, and it will chug along pausing only to ask you to reload the slides. I use "crop to inside edge", and after focusing the scanner once, turn off the autofocus function.

For this project, I had great luck in PS doing auto-Levels, checking auto-Color correction (to see if it improved) and a touch of USM at the end. Slides seldom need noise reduction on this scanner.

I don't archive slides to digital-I consider the slide to be the archive, and will re-scan as new scanners improve.

Hope this helps.

Aaron

I have one of these, works great on my ME-F, but the MX doesn't fire it. Is it a compatibility issue, or do I need a service?

Thanks,

Aaron

Thought this ironic..

http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=441646#post441646

Outside of high-end and niche cameras-Leica and Cosina and their relatives-film cameras have little to offer a manufacturers. Last year, though, Kodak sold a billion rolls of film. Someone is using it!

Even in our big-box stores, such as Best Buy, new film P&S and SLRs are available, and they still get a reasonable price.

Keep in mind, too, it isn't the professional photographer that drives the industry-it's the family snapper and the hobbyist.

Besides, I just prefer film and film cameras. I may get a digital something, but in all frankness, I doubt it will be a DSLR. Important things must be put on film.

Well, reports of the death of film are perhaps premature.. but that's another thread.

Lenses with motors-not something I think about.

However, there's a good deal of marketing savvy, if not technical need, that would point any manufacturer in the full-frame direction. After all the pixel counting gets tedious, there has to be somewhere for camera makers to aim. The affordable full-frame digicam will likely sell like crazy.

I think we're basically in agreement.

I don't have a digital camera with RAW, so I can't say for myself what advantage it might have for me. This link
http://epaperpress.com/psphoto/index.html
has some interesting comparisons on TIFF vs JPEG, and 8 vs 16 bit. I know that on a 6x6 negative, 4800 dpi scan, I can "barely" see a difference between a TIFF and JPEG if I magnify it on my screen.

Funny, thoug, I actually went out looking for a digital yesterday-even saw a K10-but I just couldn't do it.

Oh, that is wonderful. The earlier post calling Mr.Rockwell's review/opinion as "rubbish" raised my eyebrows but I kept my peace. This site is fantastic, and I will study it whenever I start to feel like buying gear.