This post is simply rude and uncalled for. No need for this on UHH.

I tend to stick with Kodak films. In 120 format, I've been shooting both Kodak Tri-X 400 and Ektar 100, but I don't think you find those anywhere in less than 5-roll packs.

The Leica M10-R is getting very solid reviews, and there already are waiting lists for the camera. The ones that were available when it was released earlier this week are gone. Leica is in a niche market, but there obviously is demand there.

If you're serious about wanting the "best" monitor -- and if it's within your budget -- I can certainly reaffirm that the EIZO ColorEdge CG279X is about as good as you'll find out there. Frankly, I don't need to worry about color calibration any longer -- the dang thing calibrates itself with the built-in colorimeter! The color calibration has been spot on, and using ICC profiles for the paper I am printing on, prints on my Epson 3880 have matched my screen perfectly.

The controls and menus on the EIZO CG297X are surprisingly easy to navigate as well. The CG297X is probably more monitor than I'll need -- it has, for example, ports for various video inputs that I'll likely never use -- but it's been a great monitor for me.

Buy well once.

Back when Life magazine was still around, every few years they would publish a magazine (or was it just a feature within a magazine?) where their photographers used only pinhole cameras. Guess they just wanted to prove that it was the Indian, not the arrow, that made all the difference. Some of the images were pretty impressive, as I recall.

PM'd you.

This is probably the "best" solution. The problem, though, is that the WR-T10/WR-R10 have been unavailable for some time. I've had a set on backorder for several months and Nikon is not able to say when they will be available again.

Scanning time is directly related to the quality of the output you're looking for. Better quality, higher-resolution scans will simply take longer than lower resolution scans. You can reduce the resolution to speed up the scan time. Some scanners will take multiple passes at the image -- yields better quality output but increases the scan time.

Digital ICE (I can't recall what the "ICE" is an abbreviation for . . .) is a hardware-based, infrared scratch and dust removal technology. The Plustek 8200ai has the infrared ICE capability, IIRC. It uses an infrared light to scan the film emulsion for scratches and dust which can them be removed by the software. Doesn't work on the silver halide emulsions of B&W film, though.

I've had some good luck with used high-end camera equipment from Japanese sellers on Ebay. Obviously, make sure the seller has a good feedback rating. I have found them to be accurate in their descriptions of the equipment.

Great pictures . . . and it worries me that I can remember/identify all of those!

I use the Nikon 500mm PF on both my D850 and D500. I have it set up on a tripod with the Really Right Stuff PG-02 Pano-Gimbal head, and that set up works great. It's fairly easy to get the camera and lens balanced on the gimbal head so that it holds its position when you let go. The RRS gimbal head is not inexpensive, but it works very well.

Since Nikon no longer makes a film scanner, the Epson V850 is about the best option that's out there -- although it is on the expensive side. In addition to the quality of the scans, a major advantage of the V850 is that it will do batch scans -- up to 12 color slides at a time, 19 negatives, or 3 frames of medium format.

I too have recently rediscovered the pleasure of medium format film photography. Especially in B&W, medium format film (I like Tri-X) just seems to have a tone and quality to it that you don't get in digital. I've used these last several months to get back into processing my own film, and it is nice to get back to your roots once in a while.

Adobe Premier Elements. Standalone software ($99 on B&H). It's the video equivalent of Photoshop Elements. Like you, I don't do much video work, but when I do, I find Premier Elements fairly easy to use.