Photoclubalpha

Nice to hear from you Henry. Looking forward to seeing the fruits of your scanning!

The 100D does look like a neat little camera. I'm not sure if it has attracted much attention away from the 'mirror-less' offerings, but it is a good exercise in how small you can make a digital slr.

That's a coincidence. I am scanning old prints dating from the '40s till '60s.

70d is "good" like that body for a Canon, 100d not on my gear of year list. Def try before you buy size is an issue and so is comfort (for me)
100d is really going as the super budget Canon 1100d replacement, it's a "buy one for girlfriend/wife" or maybe teenager child getting into photography.

I have not seen many 25 stone Russian wrestlers walking into a shop buying one
I honestly don't think it's aimed at guys really

I held and handled the 100D at my local dealer, too small for me not to mention it almost slipped out of my hands twice because everything is so rounded. My little Olympus E-450 and Sony A37 are nicer and safer to hold.

I agree, the 70D is going to be a winner just like the 60D was. It was and still is the 60D that got my attention and tempted me to go over to Canon.
I think the 100D was more about, "look every body we can go small as well".
My A37 is nicer.

Birma wrote:Nice to hear from you Henry. Looking forward to seeing the fruits of your scanning!

I am using Vuescan (as I have since 1998) and scanning with my old Minolta Dimage Scan Elite to create RGBI 64-bit raw scan files. The result is a 10mp raw file that is about 84mb uncompressed. I did a bunch of scans before I realized that I had forgotten to select the compress raw option. With raw file compression the file sizes are generally 50-60mb. I have about 285gb of raw scan files right now. Someday, little by little, I will run Vuescan again using the raw file as input and create an output tiff file. Then use PS to work on, clean up, etc. and finally import it into LR. This is something that will take years, but can be done without access to the slides/negatives or scanner -- I can do it anywhere. It is a lot of work and is not interesting to do at all. Some of the photos I am scanning are old friends and family too.

Dr. Harout wrote:That's a coincidence. I am scanning old prints dating from the '40s till '60s.

That sounds pretty cool. Scanning slides/negatives is more of a pain in the butt and a very slow process compared to scanning prints. I hope someday to get lots of old prints that my mother has and scan them. Right now I am just working on tons of my old slides/negatives though. A few weeks ago my sister came over with a box of old prints and I used a flatbed scanner to scan those for her.

Good luck with your scanning!

bakubo wrote:Sorry that I haven't been around here much. Been sort of busy doing various things. Over the last couple of months I have scanned about 4000 old slides and negatives. Still doing some each day and am doing some as I write this. That is on top of the several thousand that I have scanned since I first started scanning in 1998/99.

bakubo wrote:I am using Vuescan (as I have since 1998) and scanning with my old Minolta Dimage Scan Elite to create RGBI 64-bit raw scan files. The result is a 10mp raw file that is about 84mb uncompressed. I did a bunch of scans before I realized that I had forgotten to select the compress raw option. With raw file compression the file sizes are generally 50-60mb. I have about 285gb of raw scan files right now. Someday, little by little, I will run Vuescan again using the raw file as input and create an output tiff file. Then use PS to work on, clean up, etc. and finally import it into LR. This is something that will take years, but can be done without access to the slides/negatives or scanner -- I can do it anywhere. It is a lot of work and is not interesting to do at all. Some of the photos I am scanning are old friends and family too.

I created a thread with an update on my scanning:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... =13&t=8068