Camera scanning' 35mm negs with a micro 4/3 camera and lens

[Steve@f8]

I already have the camera, but I could benefit from guidance whether to use (and hence purchase) the Olympus 30mm f3.5 macro or the 60mm f2.8 macro.
i appreciate there’s a mismatch in format with the negs being 3x2 and the camera being 4x3, therefore wasting sensor real-estate, but hey-ho.
I‘ll try using a tripod in the first instance.
Any thoughts?

 

[MattKing]

Watching out of interest.
FWIW, If you use the camera turned 90 degrees to take two shots - one of each half of the negative - and then stitch the two, you will end up with a file that is approximately twice the number of pixels and the required 3:2 aspect ratio.

 

[bdial]

Assuming the two lenses perform similarly, the 60 will give you a little more working distance, which is handy sometimes.

 

[mtnbkr]

I'm using an Oly M43 camera as well. I've been "making do" with the Oly 14-40 Pro lens and a set of extensions, but just ordered a 7Artisans 60mm macro lens after reading a review on 35mmc.com. The only downside is that it's manual focus.

As yourself, I'm aware I'm "wasting" sensor with the mismatched formats, but for my needs it's sufficient. I just take a slightly larger shot and crop out the 35mm negative portion. I think switching to a proper macro lens will give me all the IQ I need without resorting to image stitching and such.

I actually made my own copy stand for use with the zoom, but I don't think it'll give me enough height for use with the macro. If so, I'll resort to the tripod as well.

Chris

 

[Robert Ley]

I am presently camera scanning about 40 years worth of negatives, 4x5, 6x7, 6x9, 645 and 35mm. I am using a Nikon D600 with a 105mm f2.8 AF-D lens for the medium format negs, a 60mm f2.8 micro Nikkor lens for the 4x5 and my D7100 mounted on an old Bowens Illumitran with a 60mm f5.6 companon enlarging lens. The Illumitran works great for all my 35mm both negs and slides. I would not be too concerned about not having an AF lens as I don't use AF except for confirmation of focus. I am also using Negative Lab Pro to convert the negatives and it works great and is fairly quick.

 

[250swb]

I think you should go slightly longer than strictly necessary, so 60mm for m43 and 105mm for 35mm. But some m43 cameras can pixel shift, not sure which ones in the Panasonic or Olympus lines.

 

[IMoL]

I already have the camera, but I could benefit from guidance whether to use (and hence purchase) the Olympus 30mm f3.5 macro or the 60mm f2.8 macro.
i appreciate there’s a mismatch in format with the negs being 3x2 and the camera being 4x3, therefore wasting sensor real-estate, but hey-ho.
I‘ll try using a tripod in the first instance.
Any thoughts?

I've been using M43 for camera scanning for the last 3 years or so and have the 30mm f/3.5 Olympus macro. I have been very happy with the results (from a flat field perspective) even though sometimes you need to get quite close in working distance. The lens does more than 1:1 so capturing negatives is no stretch for it optically, even when stitching multiple shots.

I tend to use a single shot for 35mm, cropping out the extra real estate to get to 3:2 ratio. For medium format, I have settled on 2 shots per 6x6 negative (with a big overlap) that merge well in LR or Camera Raw. I have tried the High-Res mode but the results were no better than the stitched version and leaves more room for errors with shake etc from the tripod/copy stand.

I have no experience with the Oly 60mm macro, but it has a good reputation. The 30mm is significantly cheaper. FWIW I have used both an E-M5 mk ii and an E-M1 mk ii with very little difference except for the extra resolution on the E-M1.

 

[Steve@f8]

I think you should go slightly longer than strictly necessary, so 60mm for m43 and 105mm for 35mm. But some m43 cameras can pixel shift, not sure which ones in the Panasonic or Olympus lines.

Can I ask why you suggest going longer, ie using the 60mm?

 

[Steve@f8]

Watching out of interest.
FWIW, If you use the camera turned 90 degrees to take two shots - one of each half of the negative - and then stitch the two, you will end up with a file that is approximately twice the number of pixels and the required 3:2 aspect ratio.

I like your idea of two portrait shots and stitching. it has never crossed my mind until I read this.

 

[Steve@f8]

I've been using M43 for camera scanning for the last 3 years or so and have the 30mm f/3.5 Olympus macro. I have been very happy with the results (from a flat field perspective) even though sometimes you need to get quite close in working distance. The lens does more than 1:1 so capturing negatives is no stretch for it optically, even when stitching multiple shots.

I tend to use a single shot for 35mm, cropping out the extra real estate to get to 3:2 ratio. For medium format, I have settled on 2 shots per 6x6 negative (with a big overlap) that merge well in LR or Camera Raw. I have tried the High-Res mode but the results were no better than the stitched version and leaves more room for errors with shake etc from the tripod/copy stand.

I have no experience with the Oly 60mm macro, but it has a good reputation. The 30mm is significantly cheaper. FWIW I have used both an E-M5 mk ii and an E-M1 mk ii with very little difference except for the extra resolution on the E-M1.

Thank you.. How close to the negative is the end of the lens to capture a 35mm frame?

 

[cloakroom]

Thank you.. How close to the negative is the end of the lens to capture a 35mm frame?

This is my setup. Fairly close but not too bed.

 

[250swb]

Can I ask why you suggest going longer, ie using the 60mm?

Because generally speaking you get a more usable macro/micro lens for shooting bugs, portraits, or whatever when you're not scanning a negative. It's the bonus of camera scanning, you potentially get a new prime lens. In terms of 35mm format there will be no difference in DOF when using 1to1 magnification between either a 60mm or 105mm lens but the 105mm will put you a bit further away to make life easier. And given most people have a 50mm prime lens and a 60mm isn't far off that, I think it makes sense to jump to the next common macro length and make the new lens an allrounder instead of one that more or less duplicates a focal length most people already have.

 

[Steve@f8]

Because generally speaking you get a more usable macro/micro lens for shooting bugs, portraits, or whatever when you're not scanning a negative. It's the bonus of camera scanning, you potentially get a new prime lens. In terms of 35mm format there will be no difference in DOF when using 1to1 magnification between either a 60mm or 105mm lens but the 105mm will put you a bit further away to make life easier. And given most people have a 50mm prime lens and a 60mm isn't far off that, I think it makes sense to jump to the next common macro length and make the new lens an allrounder instead of one that more or less duplicates a focal length most people already have.

That makes sense, thank you.

 

[brbo]

Except that 60mm in m4/3 is "120" mm and having more space between sensor and film in camera scanning in something that you actually don't want (bigger setup footprint, more trouble with vibrations..). I'd only choose a longer lens for camera scanning if longer lens had flatter focus plane, less distortion, higher and more uniform resolution across the entire frame...

I only have 30/3.5 for my E-M5 II so I can't help you choose between 30/3.5 and 60/2.8 macro. I don't use it anyway since I have scanner lenses that are better in every way than the 30/3.5 (more uniform across the frame, no CA...). 30/3.5 does have AF and from what I can remember, good centre resolution.

 

[Steve@f8]

View attachment 368444

This is my setup. Fairly close but not too bed.

Thanks for showing the set up with the 30mm. I agree that’s not too bad at all.
Incidentally, is the copy stand one you put together or purchased? It’s something I need to consider since tripod use is a PITA quite frankly. I’ve been looking at tubes and flanges to attach to a plywood base, adding a Manfrotto super clamp for the camera.

 

[Steve@f8]

Except that 60mm in m4/3 is "120" mm and having more space between sensor and film in camera scanning in something that you actually don't want (bigger setup footprint, more trouble with vibrations..). I'd only choose a longer lens for camera scanning if longer lens had flatter focus plane, less distortion, higher and more uniform resolution across the entire frame...

I only have 30/3.5 for my E-M5 II so I can't help you choose between 30/3.5 and 60/2.8 macro. I don't use it anyway since I have scanner lenses that are better in every way than the 30/3.5 (more uniform across the frame, no CA...). 30/3.5 does have AF and from what I can remember, good centre resolution.

Ah yeah, that’s a good point in favour of the shorter 30mm. On the other hand, since I have a couple of enlarger lenses (both 50mm) and a BEOON I might try this set up first.

 

[cloakroom]

Thanks for showing the set up with the 30mm. I agree that’s not too bad at all.
Incidentally, is the copy stand one you put together or purchased? It’s something I need to consider since tripod use is a PITA quite frankly. I’ve been looking at tubes and flanges to attach to a plywood base, adding a Manfrotto super clamp for the camera.

Yes, this is exactly what you are looking for. Manfrotto superclamp, K&F tripod ball head, manfrotto 1/4" to 3/8" adapter, piece of plywood and furniture leg (almost the same as tube+flange but lighter). I think the Manfrotto superclamp is a bit overkill for my setup. GX9 with 30mm macro lens is pretty light. Anyway, super easy to put together and works pretty well. Probably the weakest point is the ball head. Maybe a 3-way head would be a better choice?

 

[igzabeher]

I don't own the 30mm, but I do own the 60 and have been using it with a G9 on a Beseler copy stand for "scanning". I'm more than happy with it for my needs, sharing online. If I want something big, or prints, that's what my enlarger is for. Your experience, of course, may differ.

 

[geirtbr]

I have similar setup ! I use 35mm olympus lens but I believe the 50mm or 60mm would also work good (and its advantage to have some distance as some say). But I get okay film flatness and no flare with the one i have.

 

[MFstooges]

Watching out of interest.
FWIW, If you use the camera turned 90 degrees to take two shots - one of each half of the negative - and then stitch the two, you will end up with a file that is approximately twice the number of pixels and the required 3:2 aspect ratio.

What software do you use to stitch the two? Just curious how much time is spent and the accuracy of the stitch.

 

[MattKing]

I use the no longer supported Microsoft Image Composite Editor - but mostly I've just experimented a bit with it when it comes to digitizing slides and negatives. The results were promising enough to make it worth referencing in this thread.
I've used it more for stitching the scans of prints too large for my flatbed scanner - it works great for that.

 

[benderscameracorner]

I do my scanning currently with a Lumix G 30mm f2.8 ASPH fitted to a GX8. The 4:3 sensor captures sprockets/film edge details etc. just fine and even if you crop down to 3:2 you're still getting all the detail almost any 35mm film frame can muster at 20mpx. Even for 6x7cm etc. a single capture is fine for digital sharing or storage. I'd only bother with stitching multiple captures together if I needed a really hi-res file for large scale digital printing.

Speaking of stitching multiple shots, distortion in macro lenses can introduce artifacts into the final combined image ... seems to be where the trend of using an enlarger lens and bellows has been developed from.

My understanding is the G9, G9II and Olympus OM-E Mk2-3, EM1x and OM-1/OM-1m2 can all do pixel shift hi res shooting. Must admit I loved that feature when I borrowed an EM1x way back... they're coming down in price massively these days.... hmmm....

I am curious to get a 100mm macro lens for my Canon 6D and see if the larger sensor size (same overall resolution) improves DSLR scan quality. The 6D works better tethered too (in my experience).

Truth be told though, I do hope to get a Sony A7Rii one day, primarily for DSLR/mILC scanning, when the prices drop a bit further.

 

[benderscameracorner]

View attachment 368444

Heheh I have the same 3D printed holder! Will have to post my setup later when I'm home...

 

[loccdor]

Lenses being equal I prefer the shorter length as I have to pack my digitization rig in a plastic box when not in use due to space constraints. If you are not going to be using this macro lens to shoot anything other than film it makes sense to go shorter. Difference in prices may also be a factor.

However with the Pentax K-1 the 50mm lens really is a lot sharper than the 100mm when at 1:1. So make sure when you read reviews of these lenses that they're giving you information on their sharpness specifically at the magnification you will be using them. And look at how they perform at their sharpest aperture, since you won't need to use anything else.

 

[Samuel Dilworth]

Bump to ask a few questions of the cognoscenti, from someone looking to get into camera scanning. I’ve numbered my questions to make it easier for you to reply to just one or two points:

1. Why would you fool around with copy stands when you can get something like the Valoi easy35 or Nikon ES-2 that holds the film in the right place without the bulk and expense? Just for dealing with larger formats or another reason?
2. I’d like to use strobe for better spectral power distribution than any affordable light table or the built-in LED source of the Valoi. Any reason I shouldn’t favour the Nikon ES-2 then?
3. Speaking of Nikon, Coolscans had attractive colour for colour neg. I would still want a Coolscan if the Nikon software ran on modern computers but, since it doesn’t, half the appeal is gone. However, I notice some Nikon SLRs have a “Negative Digitizer” function that inverts the colours of photos of negatives. Does this give colour as good as the Coolscan software and, if so, is there any way to use Nikon desktop software to do the same thing with image files from non-Nikon cameras?
4. What other standalone software options are there? I don’t use Adobe software so Lightroom add-ons are useless to me.
5. I don’t see how the film can be kept flat for camera scanning (but the same problem applied to all film scanners short of the Flextights – a frustrating state of affairs that persisted for two decades with zero market response). Are people focus-stacking to get around this?
6. I have a half-frame camera. Would this complicate use of the ES-2 or easy35? I already have an Olympus 30 mm f/3.5 macro lens that would support approximately full-frame capture of half-frame negatives, which would be nice to have, but maybe the devices can’t rotate 90 degrees? Maybe you can’t adequately adjust the lens-to-film distance? The Valoi and Nikon documentation is pitiful. You’re left guessing how everything works.

Thanks!