Digitizing negatives

AceVentura0212 said:

Hello, all, I’m sure this has been asked before but here goes: I've been shooting digital for 20+ years but have recently acquired a few film cameras and now need to digitize my negatives. I've decided on using my Canon 5DsR (50mpx) camera and my Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro (the non-L) version. My question concerns the method of digitizing the negatives.

I have found on Amazon a Lens Tube mechanism that attaches to the lens and should work well with a light panel that I have. Alternatively, there is also the Copy Stand method which also seems to work well with a light panel. Click the two links to see the Amazon entries.

Click to expand...

See here - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4656918 - for a longer discussion of the JJC adapter. I’ve recently bought one in a Black Friday sale and while it won’t replace my CoolScan, it does a very good job

AceVentura0212 said:

So, as between the two is there a consensus of the better product?

Finally, I have a Manfrotto tripod w a head that will tilt in such a way that I could conceivably use that instead.

Click to expand...

Ive tried using a tripod in the past to digitise 110 negatives and I would strongly recommend a sturdy stand rather than a tripod for that application. With the JJC adapter it doesn’t matter so much as everything is locked together

AceVentura0212 said:

Any thoughts and insights will be greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

If you're only doing negs/slides, then I rather like the tube option. The big benefit to me is that - as the camera, tube and lens is one unit - you don't need to worry about vibration or shutter speeds.

I used to just take pictures against an overcast sky, but last time I used a TTL flash via an extension cord, which also worked well.

I shoot raw, so white balance can always be adjusted later, if required.

Using a tube attached to the lens sounds good, but make sure it has enough extension for a 100mm lens. You may have to get a 50 macro, which will work fine. I find b&w negatives easy to do, color requires more work, if most of your negs will be b&w use this system, if color get a scanner. The scanners are slow but so is getting the color balance correct inverting a color neg.

100mm lenses work best when you have your negative holder on the light panel and are using a copy stand. The important part with the light panel in either setup is to have the light panel aligned with the lens and negative holder.

Have fun!

Tomm111 said:

Using a tube attached to the lens sounds good, but make sure it has enough extension for a 100mm lens.

Click to expand...

It comes with enough extensions for the L version of the 100mm macro - https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66314495

I used it with a Nikon full frame and found it didn’t need an extension tube on the 60mm AF-D, so there’s a bit of wiggle room, as it were, even in the JJC recommendations

Tomm111 said:

You may have to get a 50 macro, which will work fine. I find b&w negatives easy to do, color requires more work, if most of your negs will be b&w use this system, if color get a scanner. The scanners are slow but so is getting the color balance correct inverting a color neg.

100mm lenses work best when you have your negative holder on the light panel and are using a copy stand. The important part with the light panel in either setup is to have the light panel aligned with the lens and negative holder.

Have fun!

Click to expand...

The 5DSR is awesome for digitizing. I converted an enlarger and use an LED light, but I "scanned" 6x6 and 4x5 as well. Sounds like the tube is a good and simple option.

Than you, all. As I wanted also to keep flexibility for digitizing med format and prints, I ordered a larger copy stand from a supplier in Japan thru eBay. I’ll probably have to purchase a tripod head for it but it looks much more robust than the other two systems.

Once it arrives I’ll post a review. Thanks again

I could never get the camera to be perfectly aligned with the film. Always felt like it wasn't completely level.

I've since bought the Nikon ES-2 Film Digitizing kit which puts an adapter on the end of a macro lens and you can "scan" 35mm negatives and slides. It has worked amazingly well. I have it attached to a Nikon 60mm f/2.8D macro lens on a Nikon Z6 II. I shoot in Raw and then import into Lightroom Classic. For a while, I would do the inverting myself by reversing the curves. But I purchased Negative Lab Pro software a couple of weeks ago and have to say it is well worth the money. 99% of my negatives come out perfect.

AceVentura0212 said:

Hello, all, I’m sure this has been asked before but here goes: I've been shooting digital for 20+ years but have recently acquired a few film cameras and now need to digitize my negatives. I've decided on using my Canon 5DsR (50mpx) camera and my Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro (the non-L) version. My question concerns the method of digitizing the negatives.

I have found on Amazon a Lens Tube mechanism that attaches to the lens and should work well with a light panel that I have. Alternatively, there is also the Copy Stand method which also seems to work well with a light panel. Click the two links to see the Amazon entries.

So, as between the two is there a consensus of the better product?

Finally, I have a Manfrotto tripod w a head that will tilt in such a way that I could conceivably use that instead.

Any thoughts and insights will be greatly appreciated.

Click to expand...

I use this exact Pentax M42 bellows and film attachment on a small tabletop tripod.

Thank you looks interesting

AceVentura0212 said:

Thank you looks interesting

Click to expand...

I also have a Dimage 5400 scanner, but this is faster on to get images onto a hard drive.

Take an entire roll and pull it through frame by frame. An AF bellows would make it faster, but with peaking and manual focus, you can usually light up the grain.

For processing negatives I start by reversing the tone curve.

I just picked up the JJC negative digitizer to use along with my Fuji X-T30 and the TTartisan 40mm f2.8 for X mount. the digitizer kit comes with several adapters for different focal lengths and step converters for different filter threads, but all you need for this combo is the lens and the base unit, which has a little screw for minor framing adjustments. the screw has enough travel to get the full film frame plus some extra (the negative holder has little windows along the side to allow you to white balance off the film base), or you can push all the way in so the negative fills the frame.

prior to this, I was using an epson v550, and while it did a fine job, the difference in sharpness and clarity with the camera and adapter is, quite frankly, f**king bananas.



if you're comfortable with inverting your tone curve and doing any color adjustments to the image yourself without scanner presets, or you want to use the negative lab pro plugin for lightroom, this is a really terrific option. it may not be as detailed as an opticfilm 8100, but I bet it's close, and it's cheaper, faster, and more portable.

stephenseriously said:

I just picked up the JJC negative digitizer to use along with my Fuji X-T30 and the TTartisan 40mm f2.8 for X mount. the digitizer kit comes with several adapters for different focal lengths and step converters for different filter threads, but all you need for this combo is the lens and the base unit, which has a little screw for minor framing adjustments. the screw has enough travel to get the full film frame plus some extra (the negative holder has little windows along the side to allow you to white balance off the film base), or you can push all the way in so the negative fills the frame.

prior to this, I was using an epson v550, and while it did a fine job, the difference in sharpness and clarity with the camera and adapter is, quite frankly, f**king bananas.



if you're comfortable with inverting your tone curve and doing any color adjustments to the image yourself without scanner presets, or you want to use the negative lab pro plugin for lightroom, this is a really terrific option. it may not be as detailed as an opticfilm 8100, but I bet it's close, and it's cheaper, faster, and more portable.

Click to expand...

I used to scan some with the Epson 850, and I also had a working drum scanner. While the Epson scanners are okay, in general, they aren't sharp enough for 35mm film.

A digital camera is a great option for scanning film.

Jeff Self said:

I could never get the camera to be perfectly aligned with the film. Always felt like it wasn't completely level.

I've since bought the Nikon ES-2 Film Digitizing kit which puts an adapter on the end of a macro lens and you can "scan" 35mm negatives and slides. It has worked amazingly well. I have it attached to a Nikon 60mm f/2.8D macro lens on a Nikon Z6 II. I shoot in Raw and then import into Lightroom Classic. For a while, I would do the inverting myself by reversing the curves. But I purchased Negative Lab Pro software a couple of weeks ago and have to say it is well worth the money. 99% of my negatives come out perfect.

Click to expand...

My experience exactly, except I use the old manual Micro Nikkor 55mm 2.8 with PK-13 extension tube and ES-2 on my Z9 or D850. Works fabulously!

--
Regards,
Ken - LR ACE
FAA Remote Pilot Certificate, ATP ASMEL
Mizzou PJ '66
www.kenseals.com

Hi Ace,

I have achieved good results using the same equipment (Canon 5DSR, 100 mm and a light panel). I found the tripod approach effective, but then I did not have too many negatives to process. Just FYI, I ran a comparison of macro photography versus scanning, and found the results were comparable. I would give scanning the slight edge, but it really comes down to the workflow and equipment that you prefer to use. The time that you save by not doing a high resolution scan is basically offsetting by framing, focusing, and post processing. Here's a head-to-head comparison of the two methods. Both files have been reduced. The film was Ektar 25, which I do not believe can be purchased any more. Too bad because it was a really wonderful film.


Negative Scan


Macro DSLR

I've converted my old Beseler 45 enlarger into a copy stand with a Manfrotto 410 bolted on to it and a Just-Normlicht 5000K 98CRI lightbox below. The hardest part is aligning the camera to the film below, but here's how I've done it. First I bought a piece of glass, maybe 8x10 inches to sit on the light box so there would be good very flat surface for the film. Then, using the Clinometer app on the iPhone, which is accurate to 1/10th of a degree I measure the level on both the x and y axis on the film and very carefully match those numbers to the camera mounted in the Manfrotto above using the geared adjustments.

I've tested this with the Fuji GFX100s and both the Contax 120mm Macro and the Rodenstock 105mm Macro on a Novoflex bellows and they both work very well coming very close to the performance of my Howtek drum scanner.

The biggest problem which often leads to the biggest mistakes is that it's hard to keep the film perfectly flat and it's critical to have the lens/camera parallel to the film. The mistake that is most often made is that you can not just stop the lens down to get a bit more depth of field to cover for you.

When you're at a 1:1 reproduction ratio, you're losing two full f/stops of aperture so your f/ 5.6 is now effectively f/11 and your f/8 is now f/16. And f/16 is as far as you can go without significant detail loss from diffraction. In my experience you can see the difference between f/5.6 and f/8 but f/8 is still very usable but not any further, and of course, if you're going closer than 1:1 those aperture/diffraction issues only get worse.

Using the Rodenstock 105 at approximately 1.5:1 it just about fills the GFX frame with a 35mm neg, and if it's all aligned and focused, the results are very close to scanning 35mm at 8000 on the drum scanner.

I'm processing the raw files in Capture One which is super easy for color transparencies and black white negs and a bit more time consuming but still very good for color negs.

I started down this path because, while the drum scanner is still working great and at least for the time being it can be serviced, there will come a day in the not too distant future when Aztek will either have run out of parts or they will no longer be around. So far, the results are quite promising, especially with the Rodenstock 105 macro lens.

The JJC adapter is well worth the cost. Get the backlight attachment too, since, at least for color negs, light quality (CCR) matters a lot.

How does the OP plan to invert the negatives?

Digitizing Negatives become a booming industry with film shooting growing in popularity. I have tested the best most expensive devices compared with the scanner and the scanner is hands down the winner. So evaluate the use of such a device but do not expect top-quality copies.

OBI656 said:

Digitizing Negatives become a booming industry with film shooting growing in popularity. I have tested the best most expensive devices compared with the scanner and the scanner is hands down the winner. So evaluate the use of such a device but do not expect top-quality copies.

Click to expand...

That has not been my experience. I can get great results with both my FS4000 scanner and my Canon M6ii with a 100mm macro lens. The advantage the scanner has is dust removal. It's disadvantage is slowness and large file sizes if I don't save .jpg.

ken_in_nh said:

OBI656 said:

Digitizing Negatives become a booming industry with film shooting growing in popularity. I have tested the best most expensive devices compared with the scanner and the scanner is hands down the winner. So evaluate the use of such a device but do not expect top-quality copies.

Click to expand...

That has not been my experience. I can get great results with both my FS4000 scanner and my Canon M6ii with a 100mm macro lens. The advantage the scanner has is dust removal. It's disadvantage is slowness and large file sizes if I don't save .jpg.

Click to expand...

How are you color correcting inverted files, if you are using color. B&W I don't have a problem using a camera and macro lens. Color negs I find a whole different story. One pass on my Epson V700 at 2400dpi and I am fine, though I have created specific setting in ACR it is still not fool proof with me being the fool. It is probably a toss up time wise but the scanner is more direct with less stress. I also save my scanned files as Tif and out of the camera as RAW. I am curious about inverting color negs.