Wine Rack with Mamiya

[kdthomas]

Mamiya RZ67 Pro II, 90 mm, Delta 400 in DDX.

 

[Rick50]

Lovely!

 

[cgw]

Big negatives rule!

 

[480sparky]

Excellent execution!

 

[kdthomas]

Lovely!

Big negatives rule!

Excellent execution!

Thanks all I was actually annoyed at first with the beauty dish showing up in the image, then after looking at it I kind of liked the UFO mother-ship vibe it had.

 

[unpopular]

Big negatives rule!

big negatives rule. medium negatives are still pretty great.

 

[cgw]

By "big" I meant 120. Finding that my D7200+Micro-Nikkor 40/2.8g works nicely for 120 scans.

 

[480sparky]

By "big" I meant 120. Finding that my D7200+Micro-Nikkor 40/2.8g works nicely for 120 scans.

But that still chokes you to 24mp and the resolution of the lens. If you ever get a chance to make an actual wet print, you'll see the difference.

 

[cgw]

By "big" I meant 120. Finding that my D7200+Micro-Nikkor 40/2.8g works nicely for 120 scans.

But that still chokes you to 24mp and the resolution of the lens. If you ever get a chance to make an actual wet print, you'll see the difference.

That's unlikely, so no point going there. Those 24mp and lens+a pro printed inkjet don't produce shameful results.

 

[480sparky]

By "big" I meant 120. Finding that my D7200+Micro-Nikkor 40/2.8g works nicely for 120 scans.

But that still chokes you to 24mp and the resolution of the lens. If you ever get a chance to make an actual wet print, you'll see the difference.

That's unlikely, so no point going there. Those 24mp and lens+a pro printed inkjet don't produce shameful results.

Then why not just take the original shot with the D7200 and 40mm lens?

 

[unpopular]

while @cgw would probably be better off with a high quality scanner, "why not just shoot it with the DSLR" seems like a pretty weird conclusion.

 

[480sparky]

while @cgw would probably be better off with a high quality scanner, "why not just shoot it with the DSLR" seems like a pretty weird conclusion.

How so? Isn't that the weakest link in the chain?

120 film can easily be scanned to create 150mp+ files. I shoot 6x7 and routinely make 160 to 170mp files. Let me know if there's a DSLR that can match that.

Plus, I'm not comparing scan technologies. I'm comparing it to paper & chemicals & red light bulbs.

 

[cgw]

Scanner technology is dead in the water, so much so that I'd not bother now with anything Epson or other surviving makers crank out in. Demand has stalled for scanners, so it's little wonder no one's rolled out any significant upgrades in years. I like film, still shoot lots of 35mm and have resumed shooting 120 B&W. Processing is no problem but pro labs in my area no longer affordably scan film. 24mp+ DSLRs are quick and capable. I'll pop for drum scans when needed. Welcome to 2016.

 

[480sparky]

Well, I suppose if one wants to believe buying 3' long spaghetti and breaking it into 1' pieces to get it to fit into the pot is somehow better than buying a box of 1' spaghetti,............... it's your dinner not mine.

 

[cgw]

Well, I suppose if one wants to believe buying 3' long spaghetti and breaking it into 1' pieces to get it to fit into the pot is somehow better than buying a box of 1' spaghetti,............... it's your dinner not mine.

Not sure the analogy cuts much--if any--ice. No interest in any film-vs-digital scuffles, either. Adios.