Anyone?

Got to be someone I can trust to get them back, so those who know something I don't about anyone who volunteers please watch my back via PMs...

Only had an hour or two with the car, but I'd love to try and give something back to this fellowship of 914ers.

pete

Pete,
How many are we talking here? I'll be out of town for a few weeks, but I can do it if its only a few rolls. Im guessing they are from the 916 in the latest Excellence? (best issue ever BTW!)

I have a flatbed w/ a transparency lid that does pretty good work. Not as good as a drum scan or even something like my brothers minolta slide scanner, but still pretty darn good (can resolve the dye clouds). Ever since I converted to digital bodies a few years back I haven't shot any more slide film (and thus I haven't done it in a while.) Which begs the question: Why the heck are you guys still shooting w/ film - unless they are medium format or something larger;)

SMD

I've got a similar rig to Stephen it sounds, but I'll leaving town next wednesday for 319 days!!!!

My advice would be to take them to a pro and have them scanned. The service is usually pretty cheap, and they have the equipment to really do a good job.

Zach

I have a slide scanner at home, but I'd take them to a pro. They can adjust for the best quality.

Very cool, Pete!

I'm thinking of taking my 916 "appearance replica" to the next level by duplicating the 916 interior details as closely as possible, the pictures would be very helpful.

Digital has no soul.

Yeah, I said that too until I bought one;) Two dSLRs and >10k pics later say Im a convert.

A pro drum scan would be better if you're looking to enlarge it to a poster size, but any scanner will get enough res for the largest of screens. Even modern bed scanners can resolve the dye clouds(slides) or grain(negatives). Any more resolution isn't necessary. If there are lots of pics, someone w/ an autofeeder would get the job done far easier.

I felt the same way until I bought a good DSLR camera.
It has paid for itself in film lab costs may times over, and takes very nice pictures as well.

If I had the time to do my own darkroom stuff again, I'd break out my meduim format camera and use it. But as long as I have to pay for processing, I think the 20" print size limitation from an 8mp DSLR is a good compromise.

Zach

I've played around with a friend's $5k DSLR. I agree, it was very nice. It allowed a lot of freedom. But I still had to push 3 buttons to change the aperture. And sadly, I tend to see many "trigger happy" digital photographers.

There's something special about analog. And the fact that my grandfather's 50 year old Kodakchrome slides are still as sharp and vibrant as the day they were shot really says a lot.

Pete,

I'll be happy to scan them for you. I have a very new flatbed that does slides.

lmk,
-Rusty

Wow! Gone for a day and so many responses...I'm floored!

I'll try to PM one of you next week. Gotta write a cover story under pressure and hop on an airplane...

Tis the season!!!!!

pete

You guys with digital SLR's, what have you got and what do you recommend? Approximate prices? I have been considering going digital for a couple of years, but it is not inexpensive.

I have owned various Minolta SLR's with lenses, but they seem to be fading from the market.

Im a nikon guy, but you really cont go wrong w/ a canon or nikon. Check out www.dpreview.com. I've got a D70 and D200. I think the D80 is currently the class leader in the sub-kilobuck range (it has a glass pentaprism and not the cheaper plastic pentamirror - makes a BIG difference in viewfinder brightness.) If you're looking at the ~$500 price point dslrs the nikon and canon are nearly equivalent. Nikons included 'kit' lens was often rated better then the canons, but Im not sure w/ the current models. Canons usually have the edge in lower high-ISO noise. Nikon/Canon are always releasing something bigger/better than the other every 6mo. The lenses you buy will make a bigger difference than any body will.

What Stephen said, tis good advice.

I shoot using a Canon 30D, after having switched from a "film" A2E body. $1100 or so is steep for a body, but cheap compared to the 5D ($3000+) or various 1Ds. The only downside for most of us is the conversion factor, which extends your focal length. This is only a bummer when it comes to wide angle stuff -- but Canon makes a 10-22 lens for aboout $800 for just this reason. All your longer lenses get longer, and I like that.

Ideal car-related and cost-conscious setup (IMHO):
-30D ($1,100~)
-10-22mm non L lens ($800~, and the one I still need for interiors)
-50mm 1.8 non-L prime lens ($300~)
-16-35mm L lens ($800~)
-70-200mm L lens ($1300-1800~)

So you're talking nice-914 money, but the results speak for themselves...

I've got a Nikon D100 that I bought in 2002 - they were pretty big bucks back then. Now, for about 1/3 the price you can an equally as good Nikon or Cannon.

I've always been a Nikon guy, so I went that route.

I love my camera - carry it with me always

Thanks everyone for the comments.

I am not familiar with conversion factor with respect to digital cameras. Makes me think of the 2x and 3x tele-extenders or tele-converters for film SLR's. Could someone explain conversion factor? Thanks.

I guess I need to become more familiar with digital camera speak!

The sensor size on digital cameras is smaller than a standard 35mm frame. So the outside edges of the frame are not recorded as they would be on a 35mm (standard size). So you need a wider lens.

Good explanation here.... http://www.millhouse.nl/digitalcropfactorframe.html

Are the slides mounted? I'm guessing that they probably are. They could be held flatter without the mounts.

I scanned a bunch of film on my moms film scanner with wonderful results. I would agree with the others to take them to a local pro. You will get faster service and would get your slides back faster as well.

Be prepared for huge files......

I would offer, but my mom and her equipment are a long way away now that they moved out of my basement.

Pete,
We tried to use our flatbed scanner for slides for a job my wife had. It failed and for a very good reason. The focal point of the scanner is at the top of the glass (or just past it). If your slides are mounted then the focal point will be off by the thickness of one side of the mount. What we ended up with is out of focus pictures. And yes our scanner said it would scan slides and it had an adapter to do it.

I couldn't fix the problem with the equipment I had but you can get flatbed scanners that will change the focal point. We ended up buying a digital camera (I wanted one anyway), borrowed a slide projector and projected the slides, got them into focus (only had to do this once) and took digital pictures of them.

Just an idea.

Mike

John's mom has a Nikon 35mm film scanner, and can scan negative film strips or mounted slides, and she has photoshop 7 on her pc. Doesn't use the scanner much anymore since she has gone digital.

I am trying to get in good graces for a new Pcar, and so two years ago got her a Leica Digilux 2 and this year "Santa" got her a Leica M8.

How many scans are we talking about? If it is 20 or less, I'm sure she would scan them and photoshop them for you and set them to the resolution you want, either for prints or for web viewing. If you have 100's of them, then I may have a hell of a time talking her into it since she is setting up a new house (since John tossed us out of his basement). And, we let him live with us for several years.

Pete -

How many slides are we talking about? My son-in-law has a home business in Scottsdale that does this kind of thing. (www.iscanhelp.com) He's got a very good slide scanner and I may be able to arrange something.

Everybody who offered to scan.

I can't wait seeing the pics

Gustl