Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

ektar vs 5DII - with sample
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 10:58 am    Post subject: ektar vs 5DII - with sample Reply with quote

since I have the 5DII, I don't shot film
I made a comparison with the contax 50 1.4
digital have more vignetting and it is more flat but it have more resolution, easier and cheaper


5DII

Kodak lab

scanned with dslr, as you see I have color balance issues with the ektar that I still have not resolved

comparison of resolution at 200%, 5DII have more resolution due to the grain of negative
the colors patch of digital come from the Bayer process as the lens resolve more than the sensor


Last edited by poilu on Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:11 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You just illustrate why I prefer film over digital.

The crop shows how the edges between two colou domains look weird in digital. On the opposite, the film one is pehaps grainy but transitions are smooth and, most important, have "texture", and that's what matters to me over definition...

But I understand we aren't all sharing the same point of view on images Very Happy


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Perhaps the digital is some fraction of a stop over exposed, and might hold a bit more of the stone texture with a smidge less exposure?


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 1:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I must admit I shoot quite a bit of film because I like using the cameras rather than any technical issue over film v. digital. For work related stuff I use digital. For example, I had to shoot a group of 59 artefacts from various angles. It turned into about 400 shots in the end. I could check the exposure then and there, I could check the lighting, I could check the angles etc. In my breaks during shooting I wandered around the barn in which I was working shooting images for fun using my LX loaded with Adox CHS 50.

It is courses for horses really.

K.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nesster wrote:
Perhaps the digital is some fraction of a stop over exposed, and might hold a bit more of the stone texture with a smidge less exposure?


here is the auto output from capture one with default sharpening 180,0.8
it is possible to extra sharpen and use filters for the digital but look at those details
- the grid is less flat in film and the reflection in the window more visible ( shot taken in 1 min interval, no clouds)
- the pavement of the ground have more relief on film
- the vegetation have more shade of green
- ... add your comments

capture one - kodak lab


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Selenium_27 wrote:
You just illustrate why I prefer film over digital.
In this case it´s win to Ektar - but you can´t forget it´s the finest-grain colour negative on market (not speaking about colours, which are stunning! ). And it´s also my favourite slow-speed colour negative, except the price Confused When you need to shoot at concert or anywhere indoors or at night (generally ISO from 800-1600 higher), todays DSLR cameras produce better results.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 3:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well if the 5dmkII is superior to even a £20 MTL3 with 50mm Meyer or Helios lens.......it damn well should do for what it cost Wink


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

berraneck wrote:
Selenium_27 wrote:
You just illustrate why I prefer film over digital.
In this case it´s win to Ektar - but you can´t forget it´s the finest-grain colour negative on market (not speaking about colours, which are stunning! ). And it´s also my favourite slow-speed colour negative, except the price Confused When you need to shoot at concert or anywhere indoors or at night (generally ISO from 800-1600 higher), todays DSLR cameras produce better results.


For sure, but when I go to an exhibition and I look at a digital print, I see what I mentionned in my first post : ugly transition between coloured zones.. I can't help Sad

For high ISO colour film, it's a shame that we have such a few options today...


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 6:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excalibur wrote:
Well if the 5dmkII is superior to even a £20 MTL3 with 50mm Meyer or Helios lens.......it damn well should do for what it cost Wink


Laughing Laughing Laughing yes


PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2011 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I corrected my post, the crop is 200%
here is the 100% crop of 5DII - my scan - kodak lab 6Mb


PostPosted: Thu Aug 18, 2011 6:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I shoot a lot of 135 & 120 film along with digital. I'm amazed at the quality you have from the film as my film work is not a patch on what comes out of my 5Dii.

Prints is another matter though.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Martin wrote:
I'm amazed at the quality you have from the film as
my film work is not a patch on what comes out of my 5Dii

the Kodak lab use a noritsu koki qss-32_33, it make noise reduction, sharpening and the output is jpg of 6mb
I guess the output should be enough for a print up to A4, the noritsu should also make 20mb scan if bigger enlargement are needed
it is a good solution for photographers who make 30 films a year and don't want to mess with a computer
for someone like me who take 100 shots to keep 1, I guess digital is the clever way

now for the resolution it is not so easy
professional scanner can get 150lpmm of details from Ektar, this should be more than the 80lpmm of the 5DII
for my crop, I photography a portion of the negative at 4:1 then resample; I believe a pro scanner could get more
I guess flat scanner get less details than the 6mb of the noritsu, it should be easy to compare the output of your scanner to a lab scanned cd

check http://www.twinlenslife.com/2011/01/digital-vs-film-canon-5d-mark-ii-vs.html for a nice comparison 5DII - ektar
and check also the portfolio of this pro who use film http://www.twinlenslife.com/search/label/Editorial
don't forget to check older post on the same site, you will find some incredible vintage look with Fuji's Instant Pack Film and a great test where a Fuji GS645s make a D300 look like a p&s, here is a small quote
twinlenslife wrote:
Though the majority of professionals are shooting digital now that is no measurement of what is better. It's merely a sign of the times and of what is popular today. The best of the best and nearly all of the fine art world still use film! Those of us who do not want to compromise for the sake of the trends still shoot film. Only film gives you complete access to all the information captured from highlights to shadows and still retain snappy contrast and color to boot. Only film will stand the test of time, lasting centuries longer than any of the ever changing file formats and storage devices. Only film gives you the freedom to shoot and forget about buying a cushy desk chair or failing eyesight from staring at a computer monitor all day long. Only film can make me smile! Smile


PostPosted: Sat Aug 20, 2011 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Only film can make me smile! Smile

Isn't it the most important ?
Thanks by the way poilu for that instructing comparaison.


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

how do you scan color negative with dslr? I have tried but I wasn't able to have this good result. can you tell me your setup, please? I use a sunagor (series VII whit no lens inside) slide duplicator + lens + ext. tube, however I have the crop factor problem because I use an eos 350d camera. thanks


PostPosted: Sun Aug 21, 2011 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michele wrote:
how do you scan color negative with dslr? I have tried but I wasn't able to have this good result. can you tell me your setup, please? I use a sunagor (series VII whit no lens inside) slide duplicator + lens + ext. tube, however I have the crop factor problem because I use an eos 350d camera. thanks

I use this bellow
for the crop factor, I made the wood stick to be able to move the duplicator more far away
check http://forum.mflenses.com/film-resolution-dont-miss-this-one-t10477.html for a comparison of Nikon 9000 at 4000 dpi and slide scanner (page 2)
check also http://forum.mflenses.com/best-slide-scanner-t4661.html
the main problem with this technique is for negatives like the ektar who are difficult to color balance
I have good result because I use a rodagon 75:4 lens, other lens give various result concerning resolution borders and CA


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If I understand correctly you use two bellows: one attached to the camera, than the rodagon and then the other bellow with slide mount. how can you mount the second bellow to the lens?


PostPosted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

poilu wrote:
Michele wrote:
how do you scan color negative with dslr? I have tried but I wasn't able to have this good result. can you tell me your setup, please? I use a sunagor (series VII whit no lens inside) slide duplicator + lens + ext. tube, however I have the crop factor problem because I use an eos 350d camera. thanks

I use this bellow
for the crop factor, I made the wood stick to be able to move the duplicator more far away
check http://forum.mflenses.com/film-resolution-dont-miss-this-one-t10477.html for a comparison of Nikon 9000 at 4000 dpi and slide scanner (page 2)
check also http://forum.mflenses.com/best-slide-scanner-t4661.html
the main problem with this technique is for negatives like the ektar who are difficult to color balance
I have good result because I use a rodagon 75:4 lens, other lens give various result concerning resolution borders and CA


Poilu, I'd be interested to know how you meter for the flash and how you set the flash itself. I have myself an old Metz hammerhead that I could use with a similar rig. Are you using a radio slave?

Michele, the lens is attached by means of a threaded ring screwed on filter thread. This ring is inserted in a slot in the free standard of the duplicator bellows and kept in place with the chromium plated screw you can see on top of the standard itself. Or at least my bellows unit works that way.

Cheers, M.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2011 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michele, see marty answer, I will try to write a tutorial this week to explain how to scan a negative with belllow

marty, I use the Metz only in manual, the interface is compatible Contax ttl but I don't think it is compatible with Canon ttl
the radio slave is a cheap one from thebay, now I use a cable because the battery of the radio slave is dead


PostPosted: Thu Aug 25, 2011 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, Poilu, for replaying. So basically it's trial and error, you go full manual and adjust the exposure on the camera and the flash to film distance (maybe you cut the flash power if available on your model).
The SCA interface is interchangeable, you should find the one for EOS though I think it is for film bodies and I'm not entirely sure it's fully compatible with digital Eoses.

Cheers, M.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2011 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks poilu and thanks marty. the tutorial is a great idea!! many thanks

I've tried this method (http://www.scantips.com/es-1.html) with bed results, but maybe the problem is my lens!