Thanks for your responses guys.

I found that overall, compared to the same images taken with my D300 and Tammy 28-75, that the Ektar exposures were much more red.

Of course an small compact Rollei 35 with it's dinky 40mm lens from a million years ago is always going to render it's images differently to the D300+Tammy combo, but just a point I noted for now.

I've been looking for a cheap SLR to suit a couple of the lenses I have and do more comparisons at some point in the future.

Currently got a bid on a F100, and it's looking pretty at $109!! and a few hours to go, but I don't like my chances (yet again! )

For WB, I can't actually set any in camera .. there is no setting warm or cold to suit, so this is why I had trouble in using the raw process and then opening the tiff image in Paint.net.

It was taking forever to try to get a decent WB value as my process in CNX2 was to find a reasonable grey point.

I found it in the D300 image, and simply used that same point, on the captured neg image.
ie. the same point in the image that results in a good WB setting with the D300 image has the Ektar image looking more red. It's only very slight, but still there.

WB was set with a grey/white point dropper, depending on image.
it was so much more fluent doing it in with a raw file in my raw editor, and I quickly found a good practise.
WB alterations from one shot to the other with the film wasn't as dramatic as it is say with the digital medium.

For what it;s worth, the eventual values for WB turned out to be 0.23 for the red and between 2.80-3.05 for the blue channel, when using the dropper tool.
This is a vlaue of variation from the standard values of 1 for each.
it's pretty wild, when you compare those kinds of adjustments to the average change of about 0.05 either side of 1.
Any more than those kinds of values of change in wb values from the standard of 1, when using the dropper tool ..... and the image takes on an 'alternative' look!

My problem for a long time was getting the gear I wanted to make this as easy as possible.
Not 100% there yet, and I may need to look at other lens options again if I can't find a filter step up ring adapter for the lil Nikon lens.
At the moment, I'm wrapping the gap between lens and negative with variations of 240GSM photo paper, cut to suit and folded, and an old cloth nappy(cleaned of course )

I know I'm losing a bit of contrast in the air gap between lens and film, as there isn't a perfect seal.(I think).
if I can locate this odd ball adapter ring(34.5mm to any size that allows me to get to 52mm), then I can use the bellows between lens and film to give it light sealed environment.

I've 'scanned' all the images so far, and not 100% pleased with the results, but with a couple of the images I've managed to get a good correlation between the Ektar and the D300.

Also, I have to note that the images captured both on the Ektar and the D300 reference images are pure snaps. The Rollei doesn't really allow for accurate framing, and the film was brand spanking new, but in a sense free(as a pseudo gift) so all I wanted was the reference point to work on doing it right later on down the track.