Fuji 6x9 and high quality digital output.

[eleskin]

I started with 35mm (Minolta SLR's, then Leica M) and migrated to Medium Format (Fuji GSW 690, Mamiya Universal Press, Pentax 645N) for the increased sharpness and tonal quality, Bought the M8 (this replaced everything) and I am now asking for some situations, there are some advantages to shooting 6x9 again. I am in no mood to blow $10,000 and up for medium or large format digital, and yet I am looking for a cheaper solution. Enter my Fuji GSW 690 that has been gathering dust since I went digital with the M8/M9.

I am very interested in using the Fuji GSW 690 with Kodak's new Portra films designed for scanning. I still have an old Minolta Diamage Scan Multi, but the new Epson V750 has my eye for the price (under $800) and I am sure it will outperform my old Minolta scanner (any opinions on this are welcome).

I have read and feel myself that the Fuji GSW 690 65mm Lens is one of the best lenses ever made period. Some of my own film work has confirmed this in the past. I feel it may offer me incredible potential now that there are films being made for digital scanning. Even more interesting is this: To use the GSW 690 as a 4x5! Why not take the camera and shoot it vertically with the new Portra films (pan the camera) and weave the shots together to simulate 4x5.

I know, I know, why not just take my M8 and weave many photos together? Well, most of the time, they do not match up as well as one or two great shots. I want to keep the weaving to a minimum to give a more realistic effect.

Enough said. So who here uses the GSW 690 or other Fuji 6x9 for the purpose of creating very high quality digital files and does not want to blow tens of thousands on medium and large format digital? How do you like the results from the camera and scanned film as compared to the high end DSLR's and Medium format digitals?

 

[mfogiel]

I can only tell you what my experience brings: going 6x9 for the improved quality of shots over a full frame digital would only make sense if:
1- you get a dedicated film scanner like Nikon CS9000 or better (there was one nikon on sale in the classifieds lately)
2- you shoot negative film
3- you disregard other advanages of digital DSLR's like more flexibility, speed and no processing cost.
But above all, it would make sense if you want to shoot B&W, where the tonality of film is still beyond the reach of ANY digital sensor in existence.

 

[Luna]

You want very high quality digital files? Why not shoot whatever and just have a Pro lab scan them instead of you scanning them? ( NCPS: http://www.northcoastphoto.com/Price.Sheet.2010.pdf )
NCPS offers a few options. I shoot the Fuji's (GSW/GW) and do the budget scans. I am very happy with NCPS's quality and if I wanted, I know their higher-end scans would be worth it should I need it.

Which brings me to a question...why do you want high end digital files?

Edit: Some NCPS examples...

Fuji GW690III + Neopan 400


Fuji GSW690II + Kodak Ektachrome E100SW


Fuji GW690III + Neopan 400

 

[divewizard]

NCPS scans

NCPS scans

It was the scans of North Coast Photographic Services that got me interested in shooting film again. At first I got out my Nikon FM and shot some pictures and was impressed with the results. Then I decided to try the biggest format they will scan (6X9) and settled on a Fuji GW690.

The very first roll of film I shot was some portraits of my sister Davi. I used Ilford HP5+ at ISO 1600 and a green X1 filter.





When I got the film and DVD back I was blown away by the detail, even with the grain.

The next roll I shot were of my friend Terry and his Porsche. This time I used HP5+ at ISO 400 and a yellow filter.





On an excursion a few weeks later I shot two more test rolls at the Manhattan Beach Pier (California) just before and after sunset. These shots are not great, they do show the detail in the image and scans. (You can click on any of these shots to see the full sized scans)

These two are Fuji Astia at ISO 100 and a UV filter and were shot just after sunset.










The following two shots were taken about 30-45 minutes after sunset with Ilford Delta 3200 at ISO 3200 and a UV filter. I spot metered on the roof tiles for the exposure of the Roundhouse.










I have been very happy with the GW690 and my NCPS scans and have a GSW690 on the way.

Although I can get quality pictures from my DLSRs and 35mm cameras, nothing I have seen compares to the quality I get with this. These NCPS 6x9 high-quality scans are 36 mega pixels. They are overkill for the Delta 3200, but the detail in the other pictures beats anything I have seen from DLSRs hands down.




. . . Chris

all photographs ©2010 Chris Grossman

 

[Mister E]

NCPS is my savior. I was almost frustrated enough to stop shooting film when I gave them a try. I had been getting the budget scans in both 6X9 and 35mm, but I sent my last batch off asking for the enhanced scans which should give me 4815x7588 pixels JPGs. The price is steep though, but while I've been happy with the budget 35mm scans and never found I got more detail out of the enhanced scans in 35mm it frustrated me to get smaller files back from my 6X9 than I was getting from shooting 35mm. So depending on how they come out I might be doing 35mm budget scans and 6X9 enhanced scans in the future.

 

[Johnmcd]

I still have an old Minolta Diamage Scan Multi, but the new Epson V750 has my eye for the price (under $800) and I am sure it will outperform my old Minolta scanner (any opinions on this are welcome).

Hey, don't dismiss your old Scan Multi. It does a very capable job on my 6x7 negs out of my Mamiya 7. I much prefer the out put to that from my 18mp 7D.

Rollei 100 scanned at 1600 dpi 100% crop (remember the scan multi does up to 4800 dpi)

100% Crop no sharpening 7D 100 iso

Cheers John

 

[Tim Gray]

It's kind of a shame that NCPS MF budget scans are lower resolution than the 35mm ones. At least for 6x6. Still a good deal though.

 

[Mister E]

It's kind of a shame that NCPS MF budget scans are lower resolution than the 35mm ones. At least for 6x6. Still a good deal though.

6X9 too, I agree, it's my biggest complaint with them. Why are my 6X9 shots lower resolution than some lousy 35mm shots?

 

[divewizard]

NCPS enhance scan cost

NCPS enhance scan cost

The price per 6x9 frame at NCPS when you factor in film cost, processing, and enhanced scan is about $3/frame. It is not an insignificant cost. However I got the FUJIs primarily for shots where I want that sharpness and resolution they can provide and which no small DLSR can compare.

I have not tried any of the new Medium format DLSRs, but for my purposes the $10K to $30K price tag (plus lenses) of one is more than I am willing to spend, and makes the $/frame seem more affordable given that I would have to shoot over 400 rolls of 120 to even approch that.

 

[Mister E]

I get my film for dirt cheap, so I basically only pay for processing.

 

[eleskin]

Minolta Diamage Scan multi and my Imac?

Minolta Diamage Scan multi and my Imac?

Johnmcd:

My Diamage Scan Multi is hooked up to an old Digital Equipment Corperation Pentium 2 tower and is SCSI. I only wish I could hook it up to my newer 24" I-MAC. I know there are conversion plugs for SCSI devices to plug into firewire or USB. I have been told this scanner cannot be hooked up with an adapter. I always believe however that there is always a way to do something. If not, plan B is to just keep the old PC going. It runs fine, and is of very high quality.

Yes, I have been printing some old scans from my Diamage Scan Multi in 35mm and Medium Format on my Epson 3800 on 17"x22" Exhibition Fiber and am very impressed with despite the age of the scanner. Yes, it still is good. I just wish I could hook it up to my 24" MAC!

 

[Frank Petronio]

The old Minolta film scanner will still outperform the Epson flatbed if used properly.

 

[Argenticien]

The photo and crop at the top of this thread say enough about the IQ of 6x9 Fuji images scanned to digital. The image there was scanned on a V700 at 1200 dpi, says one follow-up post. I have had Fuji 6x9 GAS, still unrequited, ever since I saw that thread. (I have been prowling for one at an "affordable" price -- having evidently defined "affordable" too low!)
--Dave

 

[divewizard]

Fuji Pro 800z & Koda Tmax 400 NCPS scans

Fuji Pro 800z & Koda Tmax 400 NCPS scans

I just got back two more rolls from NCPS today. Both were shot on October 21, 2010 on the beach in El Porto (North Manhattan Beach), California with my Fujica GW690. I have been trying various films in the camera to see which I like best. These shots were taken at about 1PM in very harsh lighting conditions.

As in the previous post you can click on the image to see the full sized NCPS enhanced scan. The only editing done to any of these was rotations to level the horizon.

These first four shots were taken with Fuji Pro 800Z & a B&W UV fliter.














The following shots were taken with Kodak TMAX 400 Hoya HMC Orange O(G) filter.









all photographs ©2010 Chris Grossman

 

[oftheherd]

Great photos!