RF 100mm macro for scanning negs?

[chrisbc]

I have a lot of unscanned negs and slides, both in 35mm and 120-film, and would like to speed up the process. So far I have been using a Screen Cezanne flatbed scanner. Although the scan quality is very good, the whole process is very time consuming, about 15 minutes per frame including mounting, cleaning and the time it takes to scan. I have the impression the 1.4 magnification and the flat field of focus of the new RF 100mm macro is ideal for the task, or are there any caveats to scanning negs/slides with a macro lens? I would be using it on the R5.

 

[tkbslc]

I have a lot of unscanned negs and slides, both in 35mm and 120-film, and would like to speed up the process. So far I have been using a Screen Cezanne flatbed scanner. Although the scan quality is very good, the whole process is very time consuming, about 15 minutes per frame including mounting, cleaning and the time it takes to scan. I have the impression the 1.4 magnification and the flat field of focus of the new RF 100mm macro is ideal for the task, or are there any caveats to scanning negs/slides with a macro lens? I would be using it on the R5.

35mm slides are going to be the exact same size as a FF sensor. Which means 1:1 is all you'd need. So you could save a bundle going with a cheaper EF version. Honestly you probably want to leave a little buffer for alignment and cropping, so maybe even a hair under 1:1. And of course 120 film is much bigger than that. So You won't need 1.4x magnification.

Also you shouldn't need IS if the slide is mounted on a slide holder to the end of the macro lens. Because it will move with the camera, you can't get camera shake blur. And you won't need AF because you'll want manual focus to stay in place as you swap slides.

So yes, RF100mm will be great, but it is very expensive. If you are buying just for film scanning, you will get great results with any EF macro lens on the adapter. Tamron 90mm, Tokina 100mm, Canon EF 100mm f2.8 (either non-L version). Or if you can find a manual only 1:1 lens, that can work too. But they aren't a lot cheaper than older EF ones.

Here's the basic process:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/tips-and-solutions/scanning-without-a-scanner-digitizing-your-film-with-a-dslr

 

[J.K.T.]

That does indeed work (I'm using EF 100 L), but getting the colors right is going to be interesting.

Nikon ES-1 used to be very handy adapter for FF, but now it is only available second hand. The current and more expensive ES-2 would likely work just as well if not better. At least it has holder for film strips. For the large format you'll have to figure out something else, if you want to tie the slide and camera into one solid piece.

If you don't do that, you'll need a good tripod or copy stand. The IS you can forget about.

 

[Phylloxera]

I copied my Kodachrome 25/64 slides with eos R + EF 100 macro. However the results were somewhat disappointing. Contrast with jpg much too high, even with picture style contrast set to -3. For good results time consuming RAW processing would be necessary. My rather old scanning device (only around 3 MP) did better.

 

[PicNoir]

I have done this work for my own needs and quality using 6D and EF 100 f/2,8 macro. No need for IS, used Raw and Lightroom. Slides and B&W negatives were good, but the tricky part are color negatives. I didn't succeed well with Fuji negatives. Perhaps with my equipment I need to play with backlight color.

 

[Karl_Guttag]

I'm not an expert on this, but I have been looking into it.

1. As others have said, by definition you need 1:1 or less to scan 35mm film.
2. A photography copy stand or a similar arrangement
   1. It important to have the camera at right angles to the film to reduce distortion and the small DOF.
3. You need a film holder to keep the film flat
4. You want a good, full-spectrum backlight (ones make for photography). Flim/slides only block light, they don't create it. If the wavelengths of light are not in the backlight, they will not make it through to be captured.
5. Shoot around f8

There are quite a few videos and articles online.

 

[J.K.T.]

I have done this work for my own needs and quality using 6D and EF 100 f/2,8 macro. No need for IS, used Raw and Lightroom. Slides and B&W negatives were good, but the tricky part are color negatives. I didn't succeed well with Fuji negatives. Perhaps with my equipment I need to play with backlight color.

Now that you mentioned it, Fuji has indeed been more problematic than most.

I would suggest RawTherapee for handling the RAW files. It allows linear curves, which siplifies handling of the colors. It is also possible to reverse the colors during RAW conversion. In any case, that is only the starting point.

 

[Morvegil]

They sell devices to do this

 

[J.K.T.]

They sell devices to do this

Not good ones - not any more ... at least not for a price possible for mere mortals.

 

[chrisbc]

Thank you very much for your insightful and helpful answer! I would of course make use of the creative possibilities of this new macro lens as well. I agree it's a big investment if only used for scanning.

 

[chrisbc]

Thank you for your helpful answer. I have anti-newton glass film holders which are used in the scanner. I guess those work with a digital camera as well. The setup looks pretty simple - a lightbox and a sturdy tripod:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explor...ut-a-scanner-digitizing-your-film-with-a-dslr
As to getting the colors right, the files from my scanner are easily inverted to positives in photoshop with very good results. Perhaps it is not so straightforward when scanning negatives with a digital camera? Have you heard of Negative lab pro? I haven't tried it, but it seems to do a good job.

 

[chrisbc]

Thank you for the feedback! I think RAW is the way to go, too much baked-in processing in a jpeg.

 

[chrisbc]

Thank you for the input. I have use RAW therapee in the past, might give it a shot again...

 

[chrisbc]

I have done this work for my own needs and quality using 6D and EF 100 f/2,8 macro. No need for IS, used Raw and Lightroom. Slides and B&W negatives were good, but the tricky part are color negatives. I didn't succeed well with Fuji negatives. Perhaps with my equipment I need to play with backlight color.

I think correct backlight is essential for best results. There is also a Lightroom plugin called Negative lab pro which could be useful, albeit I am mostly a Capture One and DxO PL user myself.

https://www.negativelabpro.com

 

[chrisbc]

What would be the max megapixel size with the R5 and 100mm RF macro when scanning a 6x7 frame (medium format film) and only taking one image of the whole frame avoiding the need to stitch multiple images?

 

[tkbslc]

What would be the max megapixel size with the R5 and 100mm RF macro when scanning a 6x7 frame (medium format film) and only taking one image of the whole frame avoiding the need to stitch multiple images?

R5 is 2x3 format, which can be converted to 6x9 and be the same ratio. So taking a picture of a 6x7 on a 6x9 sensor, you have to crop out 2 to get 9 back to 7. So you would lose 2/9 of 45MP, or a loss of 10MP. That leaves you with 35. This assumes a perfect frame, though. Realistically you’ll prob lose another few megapixels to straightening and perfecting your crop. Call it 30 ish.

 

[aut0maticdan]

That does indeed work (I'm using EF 100 L), but getting the colors right is going to be interesting.

Nikon ES-1 used to be very handy adapter for FF, but now it is only available second hand. The current and more expensive ES-2 would likely work just as well if not better. At least it has holder for film strips. For the large format you'll have to figure out something else, if you want to tie the slide and camera into one solid piece.

If you don't do that, you'll need a good tripod or copy stand. The IS you can forget about.

I agree completely. The ES-2 is the way to go, however, I don’t think canon makes a lens that will work with it (maybe the extremely expensive 50mm macro). You want something that is 50-60mm at 1:1. I use the Nikon 60 micro (old afd version). You can adapt to r mount. It is cheap and perfect for the task

You should try using negative lab pro on the raw files.

 

[tkbslc]

That does indeed work (I'm using EF 100 L), but getting the colors right is going to be interesting.

Nikon ES-1 used to be very handy adapter for FF, but now it is only available second hand. The current and more expensive ES-2 would likely work just as well if not better. At least it has holder for film strips. For the large format you'll have to figure out something else, if you want to tie the slide and camera into one solid piece.

If you don't do that, you'll need a good tripod or copy stand. The IS you can forget about.

I agree completely. The ES-2 is the way to go, however, I don’t think canon makes a lens that will work with it (maybe the extremely expensive 50mm macro). You want something that is 50-60mm at 1:1. I use the Nikon 60 micro (old afd version). You can adapt to r mount. It is cheap and perfect for the task

You should try using negative lab pro on the raw files.

I would agree, except OP has medium format film to scan, too. The ES-2 only works with 35mm film and slides.

 

[J.K.T.]

I agree completely. The ES-2 is the way to go, however, I don’t think canon makes a lens that will work with it (maybe the extremely expensive 50mm macro). You want something that is 50-60mm at 1:1.

Not really. Anything longer works. It is just a matter of finding the right distance and then getting the right amount of threaded extension tubes and step-up / step-down rings.

You should try using negative lab pro on the raw files.

I had heard about it, but forgotten. I need to have a look.

 

[J.K.T.]

You should try using negative lab pro on the raw files.

I had heard about it, but forgotten. I need to have a look.

Aaah. Lightroom. Never mind...