Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Scanners / Scanner Software

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 07-12-2018   #121
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by rionda View Post
Uh, disappointing information, as I was planning to use some incarnation of a Sony A7 to top my stack with a BEOON, a Rodegon APO N, and a Lightpad.

Did you use an "original" A7 or one of the later models (e.g., A7ii, A7R iii?) Do you think the situation may be improved with one of these?
My A7 was the original. I don't know what if anything Sony has done to the sensors in subsequent models. They seem to have dropped in a ton of features, like IBIS and such; I don't know how substantive the sensor changes have been or whether they've changed the stack by any noticeable degree for these uses.

I went back to using Leica bodies (the M9 was my first digital M, I'd owned a succession of film Ms before that) and have never looked back.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2018   #122
rionda
Never Used an SLR
 
rionda is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
My A7 was the original. [...]

I went back to using Leica bodies (the M9 was my first digital M, I'd owned a succession of film Ms before that) and have never looked back.
Out of curiosity, did you try with the A7 and a reproduction/enlarger/macro lens rather than a capture lens?

Is there any reason to blame the camera rather than the lens?
__________________
Ciao!
Matteo
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-12-2018   #123
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by rionda View Post
Out of curiosity, did you try with the A7 and a reproduction/enlarger/macro lens rather than a capture lens?

Is there any reason to blame the camera rather than the lens?
I tried the Sony A7 on the BEOON with:

- Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 (my old standard)
- Micro-Elmarit-R 60mm f/2.8 (one of the finest macro lenses in this focal length ever made)
- Summicron-R 50mm f/2 (superb, flat field lens: almost a reference lens)
- Schneider Kreuznach Componon S 50Mm F/2.8 enlarging lens
- Rodenstock APO-Rodagon-N 50mm f/2.8 enlarging lens
- Voigtländer Color Skopar 50mm f/2.5
- Summicron-M 50mm f/2
- Elmar 50mm f/3.5

Of them all, it performed best in the 1:1 to 1:3 magnification range with the Summicron-R 50mm f/2 and the Color Skopar 50mm f/2.5.

The Leica M-P240 performed better with the worst performer from the above list (the Schneider, to my amusement), and excels with all of the others. The M-D does as well, but I've only used it with the Color Skopar 50, Summicron-M 50, and Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm.

I cannot imagine that the problem is any of the lenses based on this testing.

G

BTW: Enlarging lenses are not ideally suited to capturing film to digital *unless you mount them reversed*. They're designed to go from the negative to an enlargement and have their flattest field response when the subject being imaged is behind the lens, not in front of it. Remember that paper is not absolutely flat: a negative is typically flatter. Enlarging lenses are designed to manage the small curvature of a film negative as the input from behind.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-13-2018   #124
rionda
Never Used an SLR
 
rionda is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
BTW: Enlarging lenses are not ideally suited to capturing film to digital *unless you mount them reversed*. They're designed to go from the negative to an enlargement and have their flattest field response when the subject being imaged is behind the lens, not in front of it. Remember that paper is not absolutely flat: a negative is typically flatter. Enlarging lenses are designed to manage the small curvature of a film negative as the input from behind.

Interesting point, and first time that I hear it despite having read quite a bit on the topic.
__________________
Ciao!
Matteo
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-13-2018   #125
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by rionda View Post
Interesting point, and first time that I hear it despite having read quite a bit on the topic.
I never saw it in any of the forums, but saw some problems when experimenting and asked a friend doing high end circuit board repro and masking. He told me about it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2018   #126
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
@danitoma: Nice setup. Would be great to see some sample "scans" from your efforts.
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2018   #127
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
[...] The problem is the [email protected]! Sony sensor stack: even with an SLR 50mm lens, it causes edge problems that ruin high resolution copy work [...]

Can you briefly explain what the sensor stack problem is?
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2018   #128
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
Can you briefly explain what the sensor stack problem is?
The layers of the sensor assembly use glass that is too thick. Anything other than lenses specifically designed for those kinds of sensors show degraded edge and corner performance as the ray trace goes through the layers of the stack at angles that deviate from orthogonal more and more. Moving into macro range magnifications seems to exacerbate the problem. I don't know what kind of macro-corrected lenses Sony offers.

Sony's not alone in designing sensor assemblies like this, FourThirds sensors similarly have a thick stack and don't produce the best results with non-native lenses. The good news for FourThirds users is that the effects are less significant because the sensor is so much smaller, and both Panasonic and Olympus produce several very good macro lenses designed for their sensors that work great and don't cost too much.

Because Leica's thrust with their bodies is to promote continued use of existing lenses from the R and M line cameras, they've been particularly careful to keep the sensor stack thin and more compatible with high quality results using older, existing lenses. It was this effort to maintain compatibility with existing lenses that caused the problems with the M8 sensor (too little absorption of a particular spectra) and then the M9 (such a thin coating on the sensor glasses that it was susceptible to corrosion...). The thin sensor stack promotes good imaging on older lens designs and doesn't cause exaggerated degradation at corners and edges in the macro range.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2018   #129
ColSebastianMoran
Registered User
 
ColSebastianMoran's Avatar
 
ColSebastianMoran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,100
I always thought this a great write up on sensor stack issues.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/201...oes-it-matter/

Serious guy, top notch instruments for lens testing and evaluation. The link is to the middle one of a set of, I think, three articles.
__________________
Col. Sebastian Moran, ret. (not really)

In Classifieds Now: Nikon DX Fisheye, photos in this Flickr album.
Use this link to leave feedback for me.

Named "Best heavy-game shooter in the Eastern Empire." Clubs: Anglo-Indian, Tankerville, and Bagatelle Card Club.
Sony E/FE, Nikon dSLR, and iPhone digital. Misc film.
Birds, portraits, events, family. Mindfulness, reflection, creativity, and stance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-14-2018   #130
twopointeight
Registered User
 
twopointeight is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 437
I didn't read every post in this thread, sorry if it was covered. I have an XT-2 body and Sony A7II. I could invest in a Fuji 80mm macro, or any of the suggested macros for the A7II. Which would be better to build a copy system with? Or, better to trade the A7II for an A7rII?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2018   #131
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
I used a Sony A7 body with the BEOON first. The results were good, but not great. The problem is the [email protected]! Sony sensor stack: even with an SLR 50mm lens, it causes edge problems that ruin high resolution copy work. Any of my Leica M or SL bodies and Leica M or R mount lenses do a better job—including both the Color Skopar 50/2.5 and an ancient preAI Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5.

I had my reasons for not liking that A7, this is one of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
The layers of the sensor assembly use glass that is too thick. Anything other than lenses specifically designed for those kinds of sensors show degraded edge and corner performance as the ray trace goes through the layers of the stack at angles that deviate from orthogonal more and more. Moving into macro range magnifications seems to exacerbate the problem. I don't know what kind of macro-corrected lenses Sony offers.

Sony's not alone in designing sensor assemblies like this, FourThirds sensors similarly have a thick stack and don't produce the best results with non-native lenses. The good news for FourThirds users is that the effects are less significant because the sensor is so much smaller, and both Panasonic and Olympus produce several very good macro lenses designed for their sensors that work great and don't cost too much.

Because Leica's thrust with their bodies is to promote continued use of existing lenses from the R and M line cameras, they've been particularly careful to keep the sensor stack thin and more compatible with high quality results using older, existing lenses. It was this effort to maintain compatibility with existing lenses that caused the problems with the M8 sensor (too little absorption of a particular spectra) and then the M9 (such a thin coating on the sensor glasses that it was susceptible to corrosion...). The thin sensor stack promotes good imaging on older lens designs and doesn't cause exaggerated degradation at corners and edges in the macro range.
Thanks for the detailed response.

A few posts ago I announced that I would change my Nikon D810 for a SonyA7R; well, I have meanwhile changed my mind, and opted for the Pentax K-1. I will have to investigate whether the K-1 has a thick sensor stack... hopefully I can find some info on it.

I did actually order the current Pentax 50mm f/2.8 Macro lens with it... so if the sensor should be "a thick one", I hope this lens is designed to prevent problems with that... oh well... I have a 30 days satisfaction guarantee.

By the way, the sensor-shift ability of the Pentax K-1 is one of the reasons I opted for this one. This should, in theory, be perfect for copying negatives and slides. I also like the fact that there is a great amount of K-mount lenses out there to play with, no hassle with adapters etc. And... I do already have four k-mount lenses anyway
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2018   #132
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
I was a Pentaxian once upon a time. Pentax makes some great lenses ... the Limited series that I had were truly excellent, as was my Pentax 50mm macro lens. I made and sold a lot of photographs with Pentax gear.

As I've intimated before, I can't say how much practical gain there is to scanning with even greater resolution once you're capturing around the 24 MPixel level for 35mm film, but eh? can't hurt unless the sensor shift algorithm isn't working well.

So I wouldn't worry too much about the quality. Pentax is making some good cameras and lenses, there's that huge world of older lenses to play with, and if their sensors are "thick" or "thin" stack doesn't matter much as long as they are well matched.

The only thing I wonder about, really, is why you're switching from the Nikon D810. There's even more equipment available for Nikon mount, new AND old, and Nikon makes an excellent, wide range of macro lenses. Having had all three, and given the choice between Nikon, Sony, and Pentax, I'd stick with Nikon on technical merit!

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-15-2018   #133
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
I was a Pentaxian once upon a time. Pentax makes some great lenses ... the Limited series that I had were truly excellent, as was my Pentax 50mm macro lens. I made and sold a lot of photographs with Pentax gear.

As I've intimated before, I can't say how much practical gain there is to scanning with even greater resolution once you're capturing around the 24 MPixel level for 35mm film, but eh? can't hurt unless the sensor shift algorithm isn't working well.

So I wouldn't worry too much about the quality. Pentax is making some good cameras and lenses, there's that huge world of older lenses to play with, and if their sensors are "thick" or "thin" stack doesn't matter much as long as they are well matched.

The only thing I wonder about, really, is why you're switching from the Nikon D810. There's even more equipment available for Nikon mount, new AND old, and Nikon makes an excellent, wide range of macro lenses. Having had all three, and given the choice between Nikon, Sony, and Pentax, I'd stick with Nikon on technical merit!

G
In one word: Usability.

I would like to take the D810 off the scanning rack and shoot some digital pictures once in a while. But since there are practically no "user settings" of any sort, apart from a few "banks" etc. that don't save things like ISO, I always have to change everything around again just to take a few shots in different light etc. I find that quite ridiculous. But they call it a "pro" feature, I guess...

Therefore, just having the D810 sitting around as a DSLR scaner only, was just bothering me. So I decided that having another DSLR that can do the same thing with similar, maybe even better results (sensor-shift comes to mind), and take some digital shots or video with ease (switching to another user preset), would be quite advantageous.

There are other small factors that I like about the K-1, like the tilting screen, the interesting ISO-based shooting modes, built-in image stabilization, WiFi (if it actually works right), GPS...

But only once I have it and tried it for a bit, I will be able to see if it's all worth it... I won't sell the D810 before having tried the K-1 extensively.
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-16-2018   #134
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
In one word: Usability.
....
Sounds perfectly reasonable.

I'm not so familiar with the D810 body, or with most of the modern Nikons since the F3 actually although I did have an F6 for a while and a D750 briefly. I've not been very enamored of the complexity that Nikon's jammed into their digital bodies. The D750 was a good camera but complex to use ... once the Leica SL arrived, I never touched the D750 again.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-18-2018   #135
danitoma
Registered User
 
danitoma is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 10
Hi DrTebi,

thanks, and feel free to look at this link.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Ge...Wn5N7zMkWUXWBo

Just some quick and dirty samples. Basically not edited, just converted from raw to jpeg (and if negative to color ofcourse!). No color correction and sharpening, but I don't know if google applies stuff when uploading.

This is a mix of slides and negatives. Most are between 20 and 40+ years old, from my parents ad grandparents. No idea what kind of camera and lens these were taken with. The newest is the xpan (fuji TX-1) shot, which I took probably about 6 years ago. This is a stitch from 2 Nikon d7200 shots made in Lightroom. The other scans are made with either the d7200 or my previous d7000.

Would you be willing to give a more detailed explanation how you made your metal film holder. It looks fantastic, and I've been trying to think off something like this, but couldn't coe up with anything this good. I'm especially interested in the springloaded screws, because in my setup I have to hold the filmholder open with one hand and position the film with the other. If I could use both hands on the film it would be much easier and faster!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-18-2018   #136
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by danitoma View Post
Hi DrTebi,

thanks, and feel free to look at this link.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Ge...Wn5N7zMkWUXWBo

Just some quick and dirty samples. Basically not edited, just converted from raw to jpeg (and if negative to color ofcourse!). No color correction and sharpening, but I don't know if google applies stuff when uploading.

This is a mix of slides and negatives. Most are between 20 and 40+ years old, from my parents ad grandparents. No idea what kind of camera and lens these were taken with. The newest is the xpan (fuji TX-1) shot, which I took probably about 6 years ago. This is a stitch from 2 Nikon d7200 shots made in Lightroom. The other scans are made with either the d7200 or my previous d7000.

Would you be willing to give a more detailed explanation how you made your metal film holder. It looks fantastic, and I've been trying to think off something like this, but couldn't coe up with anything this good. I'm especially interested in the springloaded screws, because in my setup I have to hold the filmholder open with one hand and position the film with the other. If I could use both hands on the film it would be much easier and faster!
Hi,

the scans look quite good! It seems like you are getting the negatives really nice and flat, at least I cannot see any problems with corner sharpness etc.

The film holder I made was initially for medium format slides. It works for 35mm (and actually better, since there is more space to "clamp" down the negative), but it should be wider to accommodate 6 negatives (I cut my film into 6, for archiving).

I have been thinking about making a new film holder for 35mm. First of all wider, but also something that could slide left to right over the light source. That way one would only mount a 6-piece strip once, and take 6 "scans", one after another, just by sliding the whole thing left to right over the light source. The camera and light would always be in the same position. This should work faster, and more reliable (no re-adjusting of the frames other than left-to-right).

If you want to build a film holder like the one I made, or similar, you would need a couple of tools... to cut and file/sand the metal, drill the holes. Not sure if you have that available.


The spring-loaded screws are really just thumb screws with a compression spring that fits over the thread.

I will take some pictures later... for your inspiration

Just remember it's only a prototype, there is definitely room for improvement. The thing I like about it most is, how flat one can clamp the negatives, and that one doesn't have to deal with any glass at all.
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-18-2018   #137
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by twopointeight View Post
I didn't read every post in this thread, sorry if it was covered. I have an XT-2 body and Sony A7II. I could invest in a Fuji 80mm macro, or any of the suggested macros for the A7II. Which would be better to build a copy system with? Or, better to trade the A7II for an A7rII?
Just noticed nobody answered your question...

Both of your cameras have 24MP resolution, so the amount of detail you will be able to capture should be pretty much the same, although the full-sensor of the Sony should potentially get better results.

Personally, I would rather use a full-frame sensor. I feel that with the Nikon's FF sensor and 36MP I can just get all the detail that's in a dense negative like a Provia 100F or similar. But it depends on your goal, I am sure you can get quite good results with 24MP as well.

When you look for a macro lens, remember that the camera to subject distance increases with larger lenses. This will make your scanning rig larger... it's much easier to build a DSLR scanner with a 50mm lens than it would be with a 100mm lens.

Having auto-focus on your macro lens also helps, as long as it focuses right (my Nikon lens didn't always...). Manual focusing is a bit more cumbersome, and therefore slower.
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-18-2018   #138
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
In response to @danitoma, here a few detailed images of my film holder. Note that all images are linked to a full-size image, so click any image if you need to see more detail.

It was initially made for 6×7 slides. For 35mm film, it could be wider, e.g. wide enough to mount six negatives.

First a shot of the whole apparatus:


The base is just a piece of plywood, with a window cut-out, which is also beveled. Plywood is not necessarily ideal, since it is prone to shed off some dust. A few layers of shellac could solve this though. This is the bottom of said piece:



On top of that is a piece of hard plastic, about 1/4" thick. The plastic has a cut-out for a diffusion piece (also plastic). It is mounted into a recess on the bottom of the black piece. The plywood and plastic piece are screwed together. It is quite easy to drill and tap plastic, and holds well.




Now come the more interesting parts, the steel pieces that actually hold the film strip. These are 1/4" thick steel pieces, about 3/4" and 1 1/2" wide. A bit over 5" long. The bottom piece as two holes in the back; the black Phillips screws pass through into threaded holes in the black plastic piece. This holds the bottom piece to the black piece.
On the front of the bottom piece are two small holes for the brass alignment pins. These stop the negative from slipping in too far.

Then there are two threaded holes into which the thumb screws go, mounting the top piece to the bottom piece.

The remaining two holes are blind holes (they don't go through the entire steel piece). These fit a compression spring. Mating blind holes are in the top piece, so that the springs are actually trapped in these blind holes, and when mounting the top to the bottom, the springs push the top piece up. This makes it much easier to mount the negatives.
You will notice that there are tiny holes in the blind holes... I drilled these through the top and bottom piece all in one go, so that I would have a guide to where exactly to drill the larger blind holes... easier than trying to measure everything exactly.




Here the same pieces from the other sides. The alignment pins should ideally also sit in blind holes...



And this is the bottom part. For the most part it's the same as the other part:




It doesn't have the alignment pins, I figured the ones on the other part are sufficient.

As you can see in the next picture, there are again springs in blind holes.
The difference in this piece is, that the bottom piece is mounted through slots to the black piece. That way it can be moved back and forward. When I clamp a negative, I leave the bottom part loose within its slots, mount the negative between the top parts, then slightly pull down the slot-mounted part to flatten the negative, and finally tighten the piece to the black piece.

It sounds a lot more complicated that it is... just look at the pictures, it's fairly simple.



Here the same piece from the other side:




You can see the bevel I filed into the edges. At first these were straight, and caused some reflections. The bevel prevents that. I could have also just painted the edges mat-black I suppose... Reflections are something to watch out for when using steel or aluminum.



Notice that I originally had pretty much the same thing built all out of the black plastic. That didn't work... the plastic, once you put a bit of tension on it, is too slippery to hold the negatives in place, and also tends to bend.

I already had the steel lying around, just did a bunch of sanding to get it nice. The screws, thumb screws, compression springs, and washers are all from my favorite place to find parts, McMaster-Carr. They've got everything for the DIY-minded person... and a great web site that makes it easy to find parts.

I used these thumb-screws. And these compression springs.

I highly recommend a drill-press and a good tapping set if you should build this yourself, or something similar. Getting all the holes lined up is a bit of a challenge. I kind of like doing a bit of metal work (I do a lot of woodworking otherwise), so this was a fun project for me


Last but not least...
I am not saying this is the ultimate way to mount negatives for DSLR scanning... There are much simpler ways to mount negatives, which may be sufficient for you. The "DigitaLIZA" for example is what Godfrey uses.

The main reason I built this holder is to avoid any glass, and to have a way to mount negatives very flat. I had a lot of trouble with anti-newton glass, which is also just another layer to collect dust.
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-19-2018   #139
Jockos
Registered User
 
Jockos's Avatar
 
Jockos is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sweden
Age: 30
Posts: 986
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
Loads of awesomenes

So, when will these be available for order? Black anodized aluminum would probably be a good option!
__________________
Don't trust anything I say or write before I get my morning coffee, at least I don't.

Da gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-19-2018   #140
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jockos View Post
So, when will these be available for order? Black anodized aluminum would probably be a good option!
Haha! I was afraid someone would ask that question...
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-20-2018   #141
danitoma
Registered User
 
danitoma is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 10
Thanks for the inspiration! Gives me some ideas to work with, maybe just starting with adding springs to my current holder.

Have you found how much film needs to be gripped minimally? Sometimes I like to get the film edge markings and it would be great if that was possible.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-20-2018   #142
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
...
I am not saying this is the ultimate way to mount negatives for DSLR scanning... There are much simpler ways to mount negatives, which may be sufficient for you. The "DigitaLIZA" for example is what Godfrey uses.
...
Um, no. Whatever gave you that idea? I posted a photo of my home-brew film channel device.

The new copy/repro stand I ordered has just arrived. Now I can do some testing with it using the new CL body and my Macro-Elmar-R 100/focusing bellows setup. Woo HOo!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-20-2018   #143
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 782
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
I am not saying this is the ultimate way to mount negatives for DSLR scanning... There are much simpler ways to mount negatives, which may be sufficient for you. The "DigitaLIZA" for example is what Godfrey uses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
Um, no. Whatever gave you that idea? I posted a photo of my home-brew film channel device.

The new copy/repro stand I ordered has just arrived. Now I can do some testing with it using the new CL body and my Macro-Elmar-R 100/focusing bellows setup. Woo HOo!
I think it's Huss that uses the DigitaLIZA. He's posted some examples on this thread.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-20-2018   #144
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
I think it's Huss that uses the DigitaLIZA. He's posted some examples on this thread.
Indeed! I posted this earlier in this thread, but here it is again:

This is how much detail I capture with a D850 and Nikon 60 2.8 lens, the pano image using a Lomo DIGITILIZA film holder, $150 copy stand and $20 lightpad from Amazon.

No messing with manual focus, in live view the camera's auto focus nails pin sharp focus instantly. Same thing with the D750 I used before the D850.

Noblex 135 Sport, Fuji C200, D850



1:1 crop from left corner, showing how sharp the Noblex 135 is (and of course the D850 scan!), and how flat the Lomo Digitiliza holds the film:

  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2018   #145
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
...
The new copy/repro stand I ordered has just arrived. Now I can do some testing with it using the new CL body and my Macro-Elmar-R 100/focusing bellows setup. Woo HOo!
A little more info: The copy stand I just received is the Novoflex Magic Studio Macro-Repro Support.

The bottom of the support is a clamp made up of two thick, precisely machined pieces that are pulled together with a pair of large bolts and large diameter, weighted clamping wheels. Right behind the post is a third bolt with a wing-nut end on top that threads down through the top piece and bears on the bottom piece. You open these three bolts up and slide them over the end of any table or stand that you want to use as a base for your work, clamp the stand in position with the two weighted clamping wheels, and then wind down the third bolt so that it bottoms on the bottom plate. This makes the vertical column exceptionally rigid and prevents it from tilting backwards.

The support column is a silky smooth machined piece with a platform that travels on it very smoothly that has a clamping screw on the side. You loosen the clamping screw, slide the platform up to the top, and bolt your camera assembly to the platform, via a thick captive bolt, through a hole in the support. It only takes a very light amount of pressure on the clamping screw to lock the platform in position even with a heavy bellows/lens/camera assembly fitted, and the pieces are so smoothly finished and fitted that you can move the camera's position very, very precisely.

There are additional machined and threaded holes in the support for use with other accessories ... such as a few different sets of copy light arms, lights, camera pedestals, stage options, etc ... that make it part of a full system for macro and close up work. For the purposes of this thread in providing a sturdy and secure support for film capture, none of those are needed. All you need is a sturdy, level table with a table top that's up to about 1.5 inches thick.

I tested using it using a Leica CL body with the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm and Macro-Elmar-R 100mm+Focusing Bellows-R, with of course the appropriate mount adapters. The 60mm lens is the correct one to use on this body for film capture of 35mm or 120 films, since the lens mount can handle both magnifications (1:2 and 1:3.5 respectively) with no additional accessories.

With the CL body, focusing is incredibly easy: I set the magnification ratio I'm looking for on the lens's focusing scale, turned on the focus peaking, set the lens aperture wide open, loosen the platform's clamping screw, and slowly raise or lower the camera assembly until the focus peaking shimmers on the surface of the negative. Snug the clamping screw and close the aperture down to f/5.6 or f/8: that's perfect focus. I then turn off the focus assist to provide a clear view for positioning of the subject. I did test shots this way of 1:3.5, 1:2, and 1:1 settings (the last with the Macro Adapter-R fitted to the camera assembly) using a precision metal ruler as a target—the magnification markings on the lens are exactly, precisely right on target.

The Novoflex Magic Studio Macro-Repro Support is pretty pricey at $260 but, WOW! Its precision, quality, and ease of use is so worth it! It blows away all the prior copy stands I've owned and used over the years, barring only the Leica BEOON, which is a more specialized use copy stand setup. And, like the BEOON, when not in use it packs down nearly flat and takes up very little space.

A brilliant piece of equipment! I'm very pleased with it. Now to make some negative captures with the CL...
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2018   #146
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by danitoma View Post
Thanks for the inspiration! Gives me some ideas to work with, maybe just starting with adding springs to my current holder.

Have you found how much film needs to be gripped minimally? Sometimes I like to get the film edge markings and it would be great if that was possible.
Glad it was of help

The clamp works with just very little of the negative inside the metal strips, about 2mm are enough. It may still overlap with the manufacturer's markings though. I guess you will have to write down the film type etc... into the exif comment for example. Unless you want that info for artistic purposes. Then I am afraid you would need to find another method of mounting.
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2018   #147
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
I think it's Huss that uses the DigitaLIZA. He's posted some examples on this thread.
Sorry, mixed that up!
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2018   #148
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
A little more info: The copy stand I just received is the Novoflex Magic Studio Macro-Repro Support.

The bottom of the support is a clamp made up of two thick, precisely machined pieces that are pulled together with a pair of large bolts and large diameter, weighted clamping wheels. Right behind the post is a third bolt with a wing-nut end on top that threads down through the top piece and bears on the bottom piece. You open these three bolts up and slide them over the end of any table or stand that you want to use as a base for your work, clamp the stand in position with the two weighted clamping wheels, and then wind down the third bolt so that it bottoms on the bottom plate. This makes the vertical column exceptionally rigid and prevents it from tilting backwards.

The support column is a silky smooth machined piece with a platform that travels on it very smoothly that has a clamping screw on the side. You loosen the clamping screw, slide the platform up to the top, and bolt your camera assembly to the platform, via a thick captive bolt, through a hole in the support. It only takes a very light amount of pressure on the clamping screw to lock the platform in position even with a heavy bellows/lens/camera assembly fitted, and the pieces are so smoothly finished and fitted that you can move the camera's position very, very precisely.

There are additional machined and threaded holes in the support for use with other accessories ... such as a few different sets of copy light arms, lights, camera pedestals, stage options, etc ... that make it part of a full system for macro and close up work. For the purposes of this thread in providing a sturdy and secure support for film capture, none of those are needed. All you need is a sturdy, level table with a table top that's up to about 1.5 inches thick.

I tested using it using a Leica CL body with the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm and Macro-Elmar-R 100mm+Focusing Bellows-R, with of course the appropriate mount adapters. The 60mm lens is the correct one to use on this body for film capture of 35mm or 120 films, since the lens mount can handle both magnifications (1:2 and 1:3.5 respectively) with no additional accessories.

With the CL body, focusing is incredibly easy: I set the magnification ratio I'm looking for on the lens's focusing scale, turned on the focus peaking, set the lens aperture wide open, loosen the platform's clamping screw, and slowly raise or lower the camera assembly until the focus peaking shimmers on the surface of the negative. Snug the clamping screw and close the aperture down to f/5.6 or f/8: that's perfect focus. I then turn off the focus assist to provide a clear view for positioning of the subject. I did test shots this way of 1:3.5, 1:2, and 1:1 settings (the last with the Macro Adapter-R fitted to the camera assembly) using a precision metal ruler as a target—the magnification markings on the lens are exactly, precisely right on target.

The Novoflex Magic Studio Macro-Repro Support is pretty pricey at $260 but, WOW! Its precision, quality, and ease of use is so worth it! It blows away all the prior copy stands I've owned and used over the years, barring only the Leica BEOON, which is a more specialized use copy stand setup. And, like the BEOON, when not in use it packs down nearly flat and takes up very little space.

A brilliant piece of equipment! I'm very pleased with it. Now to make some negative captures with the CL...
Sounds exciting.

How good is the focus peaking working out for you? Can you see film grain in your results?

I was using auto-focus with the Nikon setup (60mm Macro lens), and noticed that it didn't focus right.

Now with the new setup, the Pentax K-1 and the FA 50mm Macro, the auto-focus is right on target. Really useful... once I have the camera to negative distance set, it's so much quicker with the auto-focus. As a matter of fact, I don't even use the live view screen anymore.

Have you checked out some of the bellows systems from the old days? The Pentax, Nikon, and Olympus ones are supposed to be very nice. Dovetail slides etc.

Just wondering why you chose the Novoflex copy stand over a bellows system... maybe it's the object to lens distance? I am sure the Novoflex is great, just not exactly cheap
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-21-2018   #149
twopointeight
Registered User
 
twopointeight is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 437
Thank DrTebi for getting around to my question. I'll probably stick with the A7II and find a lens for it. I have small Leitz copy stand and a lightbox. That's all the easy part.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2018   #150
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
...
How good is the focus peaking working out for you? Can you see film grain in your results?
Perfectly. Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
I was using auto-focus with the Nikon setup (60mm Macro lens), and noticed that it didn't focus right.
I never use autofocus for macro work. My Leica Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm lens is not even an autofocus lens...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
Have you checked out some of the bellows systems from the old days? The Pentax, Nikon, and Olympus ones are supposed to be very nice. Dovetail slides etc.
I have the Leica Focusing Bellows-R. It's is a superb bellows unit with a dedicated bellows mount Macro-Elmar-R 100mm lens, built in Focusing rail, and other attachments. But the 60mm lens is more appropriate for this task...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
Just wondering why you chose the Novoflex copy stand over a bellows system... maybe it's the object to lens distance? I am sure the Novoflex is great, just not exactly cheap
A bellows is one way to get the lens extension needed for close up focusing; another way is to use a macro lens with built-in extension in the focusing mount, and sometimes, when you need additional magnification, you use both bellows and macro lens together. Whichever you need to use, dependent upon the magnification range required and the appropriate focal length lens, the camera assembly with lens and focusing system needs to be mounted on a support to target the subject. I need a support to allow copying not only 35mm and 120 negatives but other flat or low profile, small subject targets as well. A good copystand is essential to 90% of my macro and copy needs. I was tired of using crappy stands that were not stable and were imprecise. The Novoflex is very stable and very precise; it's also very flexible in use and is part of a complete system of stands, bases, backgrounds, lights and accessories targeting macro and close-up photography. These qualities make it well worth the money for my uses.

  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2018   #151
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Here are three initial test scans taken with the Leica CL body and Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm lens using my well-worn (and not cleaned or edited) strip of 120 format B&W. (Clicking each image here will net a full resolution 4000x4000 pixel rendering.)







There's much more to be had with "good" negatives (these are too thin, really) but they were easy to hand for checking the scanning setup and image reversal processing in the simple case. The Leica CL's 24 MPixel resolution and Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm lens does this job well: You can see in the full rez images that the grain is nicely imaged throughout, and there is plenty of detail in the areas of good focus and exposure.

Here's a photo of today's hastily thrown together test scan setup:



It's lacking some of the usual niceties, like proper masking of the individual negative and having the light panel be securely taped down for consistency. In order to prevent newton rings, I capture the film emulsion side up (the surface of the light panel is ANR, the glass is not) and then flip it during the image processing.

enjoy,
G
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2018   #152
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
It's lacking some of the usual niceties, like proper masking of the individual negative and having the light panel be securely taped down for consistency. In order to prevent newton rings, I capture the film emulsion side up (the surface of the light panel is ANR, the glass is not) and then flip it during the image processing.

enjoy,
G
I would be curious to know whether you see much of a difference with masking. From my own experiments I concluded that it doesn't make any noticeable difference.

You are definitely resolving down to the grain...

It would be great if you could post a scan of something like Velvia or Provia 100... To see whether a single shot resolves the finer grain as well.

By the way, the reason I asked you about bellows is actually not the bellows itself, but rather because many bellows systems come with a focusing rail. I thought that could be very useful for a DSLR scanner.
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2018   #153
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
I would be curious to know whether you see much of a difference with masking. From my own experiments I concluded that it doesn't make any noticeable difference.

You are definitely resolving down to the grain...

It would be great if you could post a scan of something like Velvia or Provia 100... To see whether a single shot resolves the finer grain as well.

By the way, the reason I asked you about bellows is actually not the bellows itself, but rather because many bellows systems come with a focusing rail. I thought that could be very useful for a DSLR scanner.
Whether masking makes a significant difference is really up to the lens being used. The Leica lenses I have are extremely well controlled on flare, so masking is not ordinarily required. But I usually do it anyway because it aids in making clean captures and can subtly improve contrast.

I was never a big fan of Velvia's over-saturated look, and haven't really shot much in way of color transparencies since the early 1980s. I don't think I ever shot any Provia 100 at all. I do have a bunch of Minox negatives shot on Agfa APX 25, which is finer grained than any color transparency can be. I'll be capturing them to high resolution files soon.

The Leica Focusing Bellows-R that I have includes a built-in fine-toothed focusing rail as part of the bellows assembly. But it's not useful for capturing 35mm or 120 format films unless I switch to the 100mm bellows-mount lens due to the magnifications required (the standard focusing mount of the 60 Macro or 50mm lenses when fitted to the bellows means they are already set to focus at a higher magnification than can cover the full frame of these negative formats), and then I have to set it up at near the height limits of the copy stand, which can induce more vibration and camera movement.

The main purpose of a focusing rail is to aid in precise focusing. If I'm able to achieve that without it because the copy stand's friction clamp works so smoothly, it's unneeded. But if I find I need the additional precision of a focusing rail, there are several I can add to the setup that are not too costly (about $150 or so for good quality). So far, I'm not seeing the need.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2018   #154
NickTrop
Registered User
 
NickTrop's Avatar
 
NickTrop is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,885
I do so admire the determination and ingenuity of the photographic DIY'ers who embark on such endeavors. Wonking around with disassembled lenses and building digital film scanners and assorted other crazy-azz projects using ordinary household items. Fascinating, Captain.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2018   #155
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
The question of whether there's enough resolution for very fine grained films came up again, so I decided to go to the the opposite end of my negative capture spectrum and test for system resolution capabilities. Using the CL fitted with Leica Focusing Bellows-R and Summicron-R 50mm f/2 lens, I set up for Minox film capture at about 1.75:1 magnification:



You can barely see it in the photo, but I have a little negative holder that was designed for a medium format film scanner to fit into the 120 film carrier, so I can use the same film channel to scan Minox negatives as I do with 120 film.

The photo shown below is a B&W self-portrait made in 1998 at Paris DeGaulle airport with a Minox C on APX 25 film processed in HC-110 developer. Remember that the original negative is 8x11 mm in size..

(Click image to obtain a full resolution rendering.)



This CL macro setup certainly shows it can image cleanly very fine grained APX25 film at 1.75:1 magnification. So what say, "hmm, what will it do with fine-grained 35mm film imaged at 1:1 magnification? Will I still see the grain?" The logic behind that question is that if I can see the grain structure clearly, there's no more detail to be had in the image than that.

So I switched back to the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm lens and fitted it with the Macro Adapter-R extension tube, enabling me to set it up for 1:1 magnification, and rephotographed the Minox film strip held exactly the same way as above:



That's good! I can still see APX25 grain structure at a 1:1 capture.

The final test is to consider that capture magnification for 6x6cm negatives is lower, down to about 1:3.75 magnification. Reset the lens configuration without the extension tube, reset the focus ... snap!



I can still see the grain structure in the 100% image with this capture, although it's beginning to get a bit more difficult to make out. My feeling is that, for my purposes, this is enough resolution for anything I'm likely to do with my photographs. So I'm now fully satisfied that the CL's APS-C sensor with the right macro copy gear is capable of returning a good, high resolution, 24 MPixel image from any film I'm going to throw at it, 120 format down to Minox subminiature format, and a 24 MPixel image of 4000x6000 pixels dimension is going to enable me to make lovely 13x20 inch prints at 300ppi output resolution, and 16x24 prints at 240ppi output resolution.

IF I were intent on imaging at the same resolution for larger film formats, and or looking to make even larger prints than that, I'd be looking for something with a larger pixel count sensor. To double linear resolution and get the same magnification capability as this setup provides, I'd need something on the order of a 96 MPixel resolution sensor (double the pixels in both linear dimensions). That would enable me to record negatives up to about four times the area of a 6x9cm negative with the same ability to capture the grain structure, presuming I have a lens and copy setup good enough to achieve those numbers optically.

Fun fun fun!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2018   #156
ColSebastianMoran
Registered User
 
ColSebastianMoran's Avatar
 
ColSebastianMoran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTebi View Post
I did actually order the current Pentax 50mm f/2.8 Macro lens with it... so if the sensor should be "a thick one", I hope this lens is designed to prevent problems with that...
My understanding is that designers of lenses for a camera incorporate facts about the sensor stack in their design. The biggest problems come when adapting a lens designed for no-stack onto a camera with a thick stack.

I haven't verified this in any testing, but it makes sense to me.
__________________
Col. Sebastian Moran, ret. (not really)

In Classifieds Now: Nikon DX Fisheye, photos in this Flickr album.
Use this link to leave feedback for me.

Named "Best heavy-game shooter in the Eastern Empire." Clubs: Anglo-Indian, Tankerville, and Bagatelle Card Club.
Sony E/FE, Nikon dSLR, and iPhone digital. Misc film.
Birds, portraits, events, family. Mindfulness, reflection, creativity, and stance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2018   #157
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColSebastianMoran View Post
My understanding is that designers of lenses for a camera incorporate facts about the sensor stack in their design. The biggest problems come when adapting a lens designed for no-stack onto a camera with a thick stack.

I haven't verified this in any testing, but it makes sense to me.
I have tested and verified that it does make a difference with the cameras and lenses I've had to work with. I've been doing adaptations of lenses to digital cameras since 2003, and working with digital imaging systems from as far back as 1984.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2018   #158
DrTebi
Slide Lover
 
DrTebi's Avatar
 
DrTebi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
The logic behind that question is that if I can see the grain structure clearly, there's no more detail to be had in the image than that.
Can't wait to prove you wrong

I appreciate your efforts, and understand the concept you are presenting. But in order to really see whether there is more... you should go in closer. And, use a 35mm film, preferably something recent that is very fine grained, like Provia or Ektar.

From my own test shots of various films, it is just barely possible for a 36MP sensor to show the film grain of some films.

Also, consider that film grain is not consistent, unlike pixels.

Check out this 100% crop from an image taken on Provia 100F:




That picture was taken with the Pentax K-1 at 1:1. Only white balance and exposure were adjusted.


You can clearly see grain structure in the tower (greenish part), but look at the cables, or the lettering... when I zoom in, I see pixel structure... but no grain structure.

Yeah I know, sounds like I am desperately trying to make the case for "film is bazillion-million pixels in resolution". Well no... I just wanted to point out that my experience is a bit different than yours... and that your scan from an old BW negative was not quite enough to convince me that 24MP is enough for 35mm film.............
__________________
My current favorites:
Fuji GW670III, Plaubel Makina 670, Konica Hexar RF,
Konica Hexar AF, Yashica Electro 35 GSN.
Mamiya ZM Quartz with lots of lenses for my SLR satisfaction.
Ricoh GXR with the A12 modules for the instant gratification.
Pentax K-1 with the 50mm f/2.8 Macro for DSLR scans

All my favorite analog images are on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-25-2018   #159
Kamph
Registered User
 
Kamph is offline
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 182
I agree with Dr. Tebi. Seeing the grain doesn't mean one can't extract more detail. In fact, scanning at a too low resolution will produce bigger grain than at higher resolutions - bigger grain that will obstruct fine detail. Look up on the concept of grain aliasing if you want to know more.
You could also think about it this way - most enlarger lenses in the dark room will allow you to focus on the grain, yet people are spending a lot of money on APO lenses to get that extra detail.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-28-2018   #160
jzagaja
My website www.horns.pl
 
jzagaja is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 330
Anyone can show resolution target at center and corner. This is what I'm getting with XT2 center.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_0043.jpg (13.8 KB, 11 views)
__________________
Jack

www.horns.pl
www.horns-diy.pl
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:25.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.