Jump to content

KevinS

Verified
  • Content Count

    517
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by KevinS

  1. I ordered thru EBay and the delivery times were much shorter than listed. About one week, I think, not over a month as stated.
  2. Just sold my classic 5D. Wasn't using it, but hung on to it for years after getting 6D. The classic was a great camera and produces images that have a nice quality to them. But I often struggled with banding in the sky, which is likely related to the 12.8M pixel count. Never have that problem with the 6D. If you're good with software, maybe the banding won't present a problem, but it did for this luddite. Lens quality could be a factor, don't know.
  3. It gets me very close to the end of the range. The ES-1 gives 24mm of travel. By manually setting the lens to minimum focus distance, the slide is in focus with the ES-1 racked out to about 23mm. If I rack the slide holder all the way out, AF (works if light source is bright enough) backs the focus off very slightly (Maybe 1 degree of lens barrel rotation). I think I'll be using AF when I get going with this, because the outer part of ES-1 wobbles quite a bit. Hard against the stop will ensure the slide is alined properly.
  4. That is without counting the step-down adapter and the empty filters. 81mm is my total extension. The ES-1 threads into the end of that. Sorry I wasn't clearer in my post. Now I'm getting curious about results, so I'll hurry to finish taxes and see if I can get images to Alamy.
  5. There are limited choices for extension tubes. I looked for tubes of both 58mm and 52mm diameter. Found two 19mm long tubes in the 58mm diameter, and one 28mm long in 52mm. That was all that was available, but it was close enough to what I needed. The step-down ring goes between the 58 and 52mm tubes. The ES-1 telescopes, so you don't have to find an exact amount of extension. For my lens (non-L), the exact amount is 81mm. Yours may vary.
  6. So far I've only taken a quick glance at image quality. Could be that the two lenses are on par. Disclaimer: I'm not very scientific and am short on time at the moment. Agreed that boxed slides have fared better than ones in sheets, simply due to dust. After reading this thread I found it the perfect excuse to try a new lens. The longer focal length macro lens is more versatile, as has been said, and I do hope to shoot a lot with it as Spring progresses. I used to do quite a few assignments involving private flower gardens. IIRC the most used lens back then was Nikkor 105 (not micro) with extension tube. On one job, I did the whole thing with a Nikkor 135 f/2; the plants as well as the owner's portrait. Currently interested in native plants as they come into bloom so the Canon 100 Macro should get a workout.
  7. Sorry to add to this already long thread, but I use Canon and have looked into this. I previously posted about the Canon 50mm Compact Macro and Nikon 55mm Micro-Nikkor, saying the Nikon was a bit sharper than the Canon. Just tried the Canon 100 f/2.8 Macro (non L) and that's what I expect to be using. The 58mm filter size meant it was easy to get some threaded extension tubes online. I guessed at the length needed and ordered the closest combination available on that day, knowing I was a bit short. Two filters with the glass removed gave enough length to make it work. The Macro lens itself is about 4.75 inches in length, and the Nikon ES-1 plus extension is about 5.75 inches in length. Total extension is about 3.2 inches. With the ES-1 racked all the way out it's easy to focus and the image very nearly fills the frame. AF did not stop hunting, which is OK. The results of a five minute test gave the best results of the three lenses I've tried, and will be fine for Alamy, I believe (will post accepted images here). One of the trial slides was old and had a lot of sky. There were hundreds of dust spots, so that one will have to go to the Nikon Coolscan 8000ED. It might be possible to completely clean the slide before shooting, but no time to try that just now. Most likely I'll use the ES-1 for slides without a lot of sky, and the scanner for the rest.
  8. Agreed. And the 100 looks to be such a good lens that it could out-perform the 55 for copying.
  9. When I bought my copy of this lens new over thirty years ago it already had an excellent reputation. I've since sold most other manual focus gear, but kept this one. Due to your posts on copying slides it looked like this method had a chance. Although the technical aspects are mostly beyond me at the moment, it's easy to see that this set-up allows for quick copying of lots of slides with great results. Scanning is something I still do now and then, but won't miss it if I stop. Regarding OP, IMO this lens beats Canon 50mm f/2.5, but a cheap adapter allows for its' use by Canon owners. The quality is such that I haven't ordered stuff from China for other lenses. Thanks!
  10. Could be processing; but DxO does display those adjustments. It also applies lens corrections which might be a problem that I can't see by looking at the settings in DxO. What looks like artifacts show in the dark green areas of a flower photograph and are more pronounced with the Canon lens. I was very surprised to see this. Best to wait for examples (busy time for me now). Just checked and found I was using ES-1 incorrectly. Correct way is to focus the lens so it says 1:1, then visually focus the image by sliding the ES-1 in and out as needed. Doing it this way fills the frame. I was racking the ES-1 all the way out, then having to adjust the focus ring on the lens in a way that resulted in a smaller image. Thanks for your question; it helped me along in this endeavor. Stay tuned!
  11. I've done some comparisons of Nikon & Canon lenses w/Nikon ES-1 Slide Copying Adapter. Since the ES-1 has 52mm threads, I was able to try it on a 55mm/2.8 Micro-Nikkor and a 50mm/2.5 Compact-Macro Canon EF. Disclaimer: Email and web browsing are still challenging to me at times. There are many on the forum who show a deeper understanding of tech issues, and I'm afraid I don't speak the language. Inspecting files at 100% is something I can do and the differences are visible. I used f/8 and f/11, aimed the rig at sunlight snow-covered front yard, live view to eliminate mirror slap. PP limited to a few DxO automatic settings and my manual adjusting of Unsharp Mask via sliders. Using a Canon 6D (20MP) and the Nikon lens + 27.5 mm of extension only fills about 80% of the frame. This is due to a difference in flange distance (index?), I think. The Canon lens + Life Size Converter shows the whole slide plus a narrow border of slide mount. The converter fills the frame nicely (makes the 50mm a 70mm), but no improvement in image quality over 25mm extension tube that I could see. I may try a cheap Nikon bellows to get the frame filled by the Nikon lens and see if the quality is maintained (I knew I shouldn't have sold those Nikon bellows!). Surprisingly, the files from the ancient Nikon are preferable to the Canon. Observations: Focus is tricky, but essential. There is a big difference in how the out of focus areas render. Nikon is smoother, Canon shows sharpening artifacts. Increasing the sharpening on the Nikon works ok, but reducing the artifacts on the Canon file not easy to do. Lighting was good, I believe, but I did read an article about diffused vs collimated light for copying negatives and recalled that I much preferred the diffuse light when working in the darkroom. Conclusions: If carefully done, I believe the Nikon files would pass Alamy QC. Maybe Canon files would, but I'll move forward with the Nikon lens for that. All files would meet my needs for family photos and stock offered on my own website. The set-up used by Phil on page one is of great interest, but I doubt that the 100mm macro plus Novoflex gear will make my shopping list. Ian M might be exploring that and it might be really good as that lens cost many times what these did. The ES-1 is a huge time-saver as there is no way to become misaligned. Higher MP count might help, as MDM has alluded. Reversing the Nikon lens would be interesting, but would require yet another doo-dad to mount the ES-1. Sorry for the rambling narrative, but know that there are many variables that I didn't anticipate, making a simple comparison impossible. If the image sizes were all consistent, that would have been simple. Canon and Nikon systems are different, and that is magnified when doing macro work. I'll have a look at DropBox this weekend and see if I can get some examples up.
  12. I'm not well experienced with Noise Reduction, if fact I didn't use it at all until I started using DxO software. The regular NR on PhotoLab 3 is fine for most images, and is the default setting. For a small percentage of images I do apply Prime, by toggling it on and off and comparing. I believe it is automatically applied to image areas as needed and I certainly don't select areas of the image. Pretty sure it works on RAW files only. Some info here; https://www.dxo.com/dxo-photolab/prime-denoising-technology/
  13. I've used Vuescan for years and find it like most software. I have to learn by trial and error, and never really feel as though I've mastered it. It's a great program, IMO, and easy to update (free). There is a guide that is very helpful, small charge to download, I think. All three of my scanners get along well with it. One is Nikon, one Minolta, and one Epson. Recently passed up a Polaroid Sprintscan for 4x5, only because of uncertainty in connecting to Apple machines. I'm confident that Vuescan would work well with that scanner, too. Be sure that you're in "Professional" mode, if the option is there, and I believe there is a "Fine" setting available for my Nikon 8000ED that I use. I look under all the tabs before scanning and check that the settings and file names are as they should be (at least the few I understand). For example, if you're doing several slides of the same subject, VS can assign consecutive file numbers to them by simply adding a "+" sign in the naming field. It won't forget, so you have to change that field when you move on to another subject. This and other tips are in the guide that someone sells online. Ed Hammrick, the developer of VS offers a free PDF guide, as well.
  14. Years ago I sent a few hundred slides to India (via a company in California). My hope was to get lots online ASAP. The scans were ok, mostly, but some not usable. Slides were returned to me all jumbled up, but in the pages, at least. Also tried medium format, and that was a disaster. The people scanning had no idea about film flatness, or even which side to put facing up. After speaking to someone in California, they redid that batch. Second try not much better, so I bought a Coolscan 8000ED and learned to use it. Another company would maybe have done a better job, but I decided to cut my losses. Despite this long thread having some interest, I'm reminded of something Klinger said early on. After looking at digital files for years, the files from slides won't look that great. I think some can pass QC, but the effort might not reap rewards. I can't seem to stay away from experimenting with some cool gear, but I don't expect to get much back in sales.
  15. Sorry, must have skimmed too fast! Got mine 2nd hand for little money. The life size converter costs as much as the lens, but probably worth it as I think there are optical elements in it, and may be an improvement over extension tube. Winter is the time I dabble in these type of projects, but slowly. Hope to spend some time on this soon. The two lenses look similar, and both produce sharp photos in normal use. If the ES-1 allows a good result, I'll forgo the numerous bellows, etc., that I've accumulated edit; ordered life size converter, will test next week
  16. I skimmed this long thread and don't see a mention of the Canon 50mm f/2.5 Macro. It takes 52mm filters, so the Nikon ES-1 threads right on, eliminating the alignment problem (which I agree is a big plus for ES-1). I don't have the "Life size converter" that is available for this lens. Instead, I use a 25mm extension tube between the camera & lens. With that a slide nearly fills the frame, which is consistent with the fact that ES-1 is designed for a slightly longer lens. Haven't done any work with this yet. Should I find some time, I'll post the results here. I think the Canon lens is very close to the 55 Micro-Nikkor. I do have that lens also and hope to compare them sometime.
  17. The 'Prime" NR on DXO PhotoLab3 is good, as far as I can tell. The auto setting always seems to work, but there are sliders for adjusting manually. The 'HQ' NR is faster than Prime, and usually adequate to my eyes. Both are in PL3. I think they offer a free trial.
  18. In the Alamy Image Manager (AIM) you can set this. It's under the little gear near your name in the upper right.
  19. Also the big one here, and it's rare for the voters to reject a school budget. Our property tax bill (from the town) is broken down into Land and Buildings. Owners of undeveloped land pay property tax even if there is no building. I have to pay the odious tax on 'Personal Property Used in Business' on cameras, computer hardware & software, scanners, desk, chair, on and on, each year. Going from a business to a hobby is now on my radar, and more in line with the fees I'm seeing.
  20. Phil, There seems to be an increasing trend here in the US for "user pays" in things like parks, museums, some roads, etc. We now pay to visit the Maine State Museum here to see our own stuff. Same with State Parks in this state. More to the point, I'm sure that landlords in the UK pay tax on the property they reside on. Rather than have a landlord pay tax and pass the cost on to the tenant, the tenant pays directly. This seems cleaner to me than making the owner pay for services the tenant receives.
  21. I've run into this (DJI blocking take-off), but now that I understand more about airspace, I'm willing to learn how to 'unlock' the aircraft for those locations. It's another hassle to learn to do this just to fly in unrestricted airspace, but that's the current state of things. I wouldn't mind if the FAA (US Gov't) was doing the blocking, but it's a Chinese company telling me I can't take off. There are other companies now making drones that I'll be looking at.
  22. A few years ago I decided it wasn't worth it. Lately the aircraft got better, the price went down, and I really wanted to try a flying camera regardless of the returns. I also learned that here in the US there is a concerted effort by the FAA to integrate sUAV(drones) into the National Airspace (this is good). Got my certificate last Spring and fly a M2P. The camera is good enough for Alamy (same as RX100?), but not like my 6D. BTW, drone manufacturer DJI bought Hasselblad, hence the name on the camera. Maybe Hasselblad engineers worked on it, but it's nothing special. Expect files just like from Sony RX100 (altho my M2P has stronger vignetting). There is a very active Mavic forum (mavicpilots) with many members from the UK (+worldwide). I read lots before taking the test, and I now spend many more hours reading than flying. Despite the difficulties (not many in US), there is nothing like it. I love being part of the world of aviation, even in a small way.
  23. I submitted about 15 this past Autumn; all passed and can be seen on the most recent page of my photos here.
  24. Volume down by 12%, revenue up 20%. Revenue skewed by a $$$ book cover. Have a great 2020!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.