colonel Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share #21 Â Posted January 11, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Â Â Â As far as unloading film cartridges easily, I've had trouble for 12 years. Recently, after reading about it, I tried the trick of not fully rewinding film into the cartridge, leaving some film trailer outside. With light pressure of a fingertip you can press down on the upper trailer film edge and the whole cartridge will easily leave the camera. Â Â Â Â Â I have to say that if I had to list my main issues with the camera this would not be one. The film does need a firm pull out but it ok man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 Hi colonel, Take a look here An M7 newbie rambles (warning photos!). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
erl Posted January 11, 2015 Share #22 Â Posted January 11, 2015 Because I self process everything, I always leave a trailing tongue out when re-winding. That way it is easier to handle in the darkroom. The side benefit, I think, is that this tecnique prevents the cassette from slightly rotating in the chamber when trying to remove it. If it does rotate, the light trap on the cassette can catch on the camera body. Keeping it 'straight' I am sure helps removal. My M7 has the old 'gold fingers' for DX reading. Never had any trouble to date. Â Last used about 10 min ago. Â P.S. Keeping 'straight' also helps in M6's too I reckon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted January 12, 2015 Share #23  Posted January 12, 2015 Thank you for the nice review Harold. And a warm welcome back to film.  The images you posted are nice, but very contrasty with a bit of an odd colour cast on some (the Westminster, bouquet, North Jordan Valley and Hill near Nazareth in particular). In my experience this is the result of lab scanners. All images have crushed shadow areas and very little tonality in the darker zones. If you scan yourself you will see the enormous difference it makes.  Btw, as you certainly know, it's not "image noise" - it's grain and it is to an image what air is to us carbon-based bipeds  If you scan yourself you will also have much better control of the grain. In my experience Portra 400 is not very grainy at all, but to experience a virtual absence of grain one has to shoot slides (in 35mm).  These are all excellent scanners. The 9000/8000 is overkill for 35mm (M7) because of it's cost, but fabulous for MF and 35mm combined.The 5000 is 'top of the range'.  I have the 9000 and love it for 35mm. It does give better results than the V ED, which I also have. I would, however, disagree that the 9000 is an overkill for 35mm, even compared with the 5000. The reason I say this is that the 9000 loads two strips of film (2x6 negs) in a holder which ensures that the full negative is scanned. I could never get the V ED, which like the 5000 takes a strip at the time, to scan the full neg. I tried with all sorts of settings in Vuescan to prevent the scanner from "gliding" and capturing more and more of the unexposed film between the frames the further in it got on a strip of negatives. The 9000 (and the 8000) deals with this nicely. And gives the option to scan a host of other formats too. Just my 2ct.  Regarding the original DX reader, please consider putting tape over the two common-ground contacts of the DX code on the film cartridge. The little error light will still flash, but after time you come to consider it a reassurance that the electronics are still working. The rest of the light flashing riot the M7 can offer will be gone ... until you forget to tape up the film cartridge's two DX common-ground contacts before loading it.  The flashing LEDs, esp when pushing film, is something I simply couldn't accept and, together with the freely spinning shutter dial, the reason why I never bought an M7.  Br Philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 12, 2015 Share #24 Â Posted January 12, 2015 Philip, I am very surprised at the 'gliding' problem you describe with the V ED. Certainly I have none of that with the 5000. It automatically (it seems) to read the image spacing, which does vary between my 111f and M7. Very occasionally I adjust the 'streaming ants' to suit a particular image, but otherwise I don't need to interfere. Â I understand what you say about the two strips of 6 that can be scanned on the 9000/8000. The only time I ever did that was to batch scan which works very well as such. I never do it now, but prefer individual scans for various reasons. As for speed, I reckon the 5000 is at least 3 times faster than the 8000. I believe the main difference between the 8000 and 9000 is improved speed on the 9000. All are excellent machines IMV. Â I have modified a carrier for MF to use in the 8000 because the standard holder is poorly designed and I had a lot of trouble keeping film flat over the entire area. I now have a combo of glass and glassless holders from an old enlarger. Cost nothing and works perfectly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted January 12, 2015 Share #25  Posted January 12, 2015 Hi Erl  I batch scan all my films at 2000dpi using profiles in Vuescan. A b&w 36 roll takes about 50 minutes and I do rudimentary Photoshop adjustments using a few pre-programmed actions and spotting (to get a "master" TIFF and a jpg) while the scanner works. C41 and slides take about the same; while the scan time is slightly longer I usually do not need to spot them because the digital ICE is so good. I will only scan individually (and then at 4000dpi) for printing. The 9000 is an excellent batch scanner imho.  I've tried everything with the V ED to get it to scan the full image of all frames on a 6-strip but it doesn't work. My M4 has a different frame spacing than the TTL and the II(D) is yet again different (not to mention my 1N). Adjusting the marching ants would extend the scanning time beyond reason for me.  About film flatness, there was recently a discussion in the Yahoo Coolscan 8000/9000 group where Sam Agnew (who does some very nice scans with his 9000 in my opinion and usually posts full resolution images in his Flickr) recommended getting anti-Newton glass from Focal Point to use with the 35mm holder sans cover.  br Philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 12, 2015 Share #26 Â Posted January 12, 2015 Philip, it is clear the 9000 is much faster than the 8000. My 8000 takes forever to scan, but I have a dedcated computer for it so I can keep working without interruption or delay, on my main machine. Â I have an Epson V700 that I dedicate to making contact sheets of all films, so I don't need a batch scanning facility anymore. Â It would seem a big difference between the V ED and the 5000 is not just speed, but good auto adjustment for frame spacing because mine handles all that with ease, using VueScan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre1960 Posted January 21, 2015 Share #27 Â Posted January 21, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Erl, Â I also have problems with the medium format film holder on de coolscan 8000. Could you let me know what kind of modification you did. Always interested in free solutions. [emoji1] Â Regards Andre Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted January 21, 2015 Share #28  Posted January 21, 2015 ...getting anti-Newton glass from Focal Point to use with the 35mm holder sans cover.  br Philip  Philip,  Thank you so much for dropping this in your response! I'm very close to needing a new AN glass for my enlarger and had, until now, no luck in finding a source.  Thanks! s-a Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 21, 2015 Share #29  Posted January 21, 2015 Hi Erl, I also have problems with the medium format film holder on de coolscan 8000. Could you let me know what kind of modification you did. Always interested in free solutions. [emoji1]  Regards Andre Hi Andre, I will make some pictures to illustrate what I did. Give me maybe a day to 'clear my desk' to find time to do it. PM me a reminder if I don't respond within 24 hrs or so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre1960 Posted January 22, 2015 Share #30 Â Posted January 22, 2015 OK thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 23, 2015 Share #31  Posted January 23, 2015 Andre, here are some quick pics that I hope illustrate what I was referring to.  Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!   The holder designation is FH-869M. It is the normal transparency holder for the 8000. I use it for unmounted film (mainly negs) and I have glued two strips of (white) cardboard inside the 'runners' of the moulding. This is to firmly position the glass and masking frame that I use to sandwich the film flat. You can use either two glasses, one anti newton, or one glass and one masking frame as I prefer. This is sufficient to hold the film flat and only requires cleaning of one glass. You can experiment with two masks and no glass, but I think the scanner is more critical than an enlarger so I only use one glass. Results are perfect as far as I am concerned.  If you don't have or can't get the above transparency holder, I reckon it would be easy to unscrew the moving film clamp from the standard 120 film holder FH-869S and insert a frame mask and/or glass in that holder. This would allow scanning of one frame at a time, same as my system, but I don't see that as a disadvantage, at least for me.  I hope some of this can help or give you ideas. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!   The holder designation is FH-869M. It is the normal transparency holder for the 8000. I use it for unmounted film (mainly negs) and I have glued two strips of (white) cardboard inside the 'runners' of the moulding. This is to firmly position the glass and masking frame that I use to sandwich the film flat. You can use either two glasses, one anti newton, or one glass and one masking frame as I prefer. This is sufficient to hold the film flat and only requires cleaning of one glass. You can experiment with two masks and no glass, but I think the scanner is more critical than an enlarger so I only use one glass. Results are perfect as far as I am concerned.  If you don't have or can't get the above transparency holder, I reckon it would be easy to unscrew the moving film clamp from the standard 120 film holder FH-869S and insert a frame mask and/or glass in that holder. This would allow scanning of one frame at a time, same as my system, but I don't see that as a disadvantage, at least for me.  I hope some of this can help or give you ideas. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/239518-an-m7-newbie-rambles-warning-photos/?do=findComment&comment=2751539'>More sharing options...
Andre1960 Posted January 23, 2015 Share #32 Â Posted January 23, 2015 Hi Erl, Many thanks for the clear info. I will give it a try on my standard film holder by taking out the "clamps" and adding some AN glass. Thanks again for taking the effort. Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.