Recent versions of Affinity Photo have done a very nice job of stitching for me. Suggest shooting in manual (fixed shutter speed / aperture) so it doesn't have to finagle the range for each exposure, and a 10-20% overlap doesn't hurt.
That is particularly interesting to me as I own the same camera and considering buying a macro lens to give DSLR scanning a go. What particular lens do you use (AI vs AF, etc...)? I seem to remember that 55mm has a 1:2 ratio, are you able get reasonably close to the negative for 35mm work?
I have an 80d and I'm starting with dslr scanning. What lens do you think I Should I look for buying? And do you have some 35mm photos scan with the 80d that you can show? ThanksYes. I started DLSR scanning with a Canon T5i, moved to a Canon 80D and ran that for quite a long time, then moved to a Canon 90D when it was released. APS-C is better if you're primarily scanning 35mm film as it doesn't require a macro lens that can go all the way to 1:1 reproduction. If you primarily scan 120 roll film or sheet film, a full frame digital camera can be better simply because it can get to higher resolutions, but at that point, you're spending some good cash to get there, and you really need to have a really stellar lens that is sharp all the way into the corners to fully realize all the quality you can get there.
I have an 80d and I'm starting with dslr scanning. What lens do you think I Should I look for buying? And do you have some 35mm photos scan with the 80d that you can show? Thanks
Film flatness is easily handled with a glass holder. And why wouldn’t you do stitching‽Ive done some DSLR scanning with an 18MP Canon APS-C DSLR, so same resolution as the 60D. However, I was using a dedicated macro lens with which I was able to fill the frame with a 35mm frame. I was able to compare the results to those from an Epson V700, which is quite a bit better than the OP's V600. In general, the DSLR shots captured moderately more detail than the V700. There were a few places where detail was worse with the DSLR due to the film curving away from the focal plane, but overall it was better. Noise was also generally a bit lower with the DSLR captures. In terms of colour however, and ease of doing the processing necessary for colour negatives, I would choose the Epson. I actually scan negatives in positive mode on the Epson, so still have to do a reversal process, but the capture is much more linear with the Epson, whereas the profiles used by raw processing software distort the colours significantly, making this job harder. There are ways around this, but most of them involve purchasing software.
So whether you will be able to improve on your V600 with your APS-C DSLR will very much depend on your lens and how close you can get with it (there are many other factors as well, but this will be one of the main limiting factors). If you can fill around a third of the DSLR frame with the 35mm frame then I'd say you would roughly equal the scanner in terms of detail. Any bigger than this and you will start to see an improvement.
With 120 film, even assuming you can fill one dimension of the DSLR frame with the film frame, you will struggle to get any better than your V600. Maybe a bit better with 645, but probably worse with 6x6 and larger, unless you stitch multiple shots.
There are many other aspects of image quality to consider, such as evenness of illumination, film flatness, dust, flare, reflections, as well as convenience and speed, but these will all depend on your particular set up and process.
hanks! But that lens are a bit expensive for me, do you think a Canon 60mm USM macro or the 100mm macro USM are a good choice? Also if you have some with the 90D It would be great toofor a lens, I currently use the sigma 70mm macro art lens and have no plans to change that any time soon.. It is excellent. If you’re going to spend money, spend it on the lens. The canon 100mm macro is good if you’re going full frame, but it’s less resolution in the center than the sigma, so isn’t as well suited for APS-C. I’d only get it if I was planning to move to full frame, but even then, the Sigma is probably at least an equal, if not better, though I’ve not tested that due to lack of equipment.
for samples, I’d have to look. I’ve been on the 90D for a while at this point, and I’ve rescanned most of my stuff with it, so I’d have to dig around a bit.
hanks! But that lens are a bit expensive for me, do you think a Canon 60mm USM macro or the 100mm macro USM are a good choice? Also if you have some with the 90D It would be great too
If you buy it knew, but I was thinking on getting a used one and the sigma are more rare to find. And not the L version of the 100 mm the other one that is cheaperThe canon 100mm macro is more money than the sigma, and the cost difference between the sigma and canon 60mm macro is less than $200.
What do you use for stitching? I've done it manually and have no desire to do that. Also tried Hugin but could never get it right.
If you buy it knew, but I was thinking on getting a used one and the sigma are more rare to find. And not the L version of the 100 mm the other one that is cheaper
I just answered this question over on the Large Format forum. I'll cut and paste it here.
I've been using PTgui for about 17 years. Back then stitched panos were pretty new and the few other options available were useless. There are many more options now, in fact pano stitching is built in to most programs like ON1, PS etc. But there is one big difference between them and PTgui. That is that with PTgui you can manually apply control points, it's not normally required but for example if you have a photo with a lot of fuzzy water, or other areas with no real detail, I find that most programs struggle to lock onto what parts of each image should match. PTgui can struggle with this as well, but with it you just go in and create a few control points manually to give it a hand.
PTgui also allows a lot of control over the image placement, rotation of the pano, fixing of panos that point up or down and also format of the output. For example you can output to a layered PSD file where each image is on it's own layer with a mask. Thus if there are some funnies you can get in there and tweak things.
[link to PTgui was here but as a newbie it seems I'm not allowed to post it]
Oh, and the gotcha I mentioned above (in a previous post)? If scanning roll film DON'T include the lettering on the edges. The pano software (all 3 I tried) sees "PORTRA" in one place and two frames away sees another "PORTRA" and thinks that they are matching parts of separate frames, the results are interesting if not that usefulI was tearing my hair out about this and with the other two programs I could do nothing about it as there was no information supplied. Then I looked at the control points automatically produced in PTgui and saw dozens of them clustered around these letters and numbers and realised the problem.
This pic shows a heap of good control points on the rocks but some up on the lettering as well.
This actual example would be OK because they are adjoining frames, I couldn't find an example of a bad match, but you get the idea.
All that said it does seem to be a problem with using RAW files as much as the lettering, so I just convert them to TIFF and either don't shoot the lettering or crop it out before feeding the images into PTgui.
YMMV, but I would give it a try...I just had a look at their site, it costs US$154 these days, yikes. Panos (normal ones) are a big thing with me so I don't mind spending a few $, but that's a lot. Still, it's cheaper than buying a scanner
Has anyone had success with a APS-C sensor camera? I have a Canon 60D DSLR I'd like to use for scanning 35mm and 120 film, but before investing in a copying system I'd like to know if the resolution of 18MP is sufficient, as I'm not sure I can obtain 1:1 macro with my existing lenses.
Do you have an email or some way I can talk to you, I'm new to the forum so I can't send you a message and I don't want to post more messages on this post. I just have some questions just to not make a mistake when buying the lens. Thanks.well, what you go with is up to you. A very good lens is a sound investment, so if it were me, I wouldn’t skimp.
Do you have an email or some way I can talk to you, I'm new to the forum so I can't send you a message and I don't want to post more messages on this post. I just have some questions just to not make a mistake when buying the lens. Thanks.
in 'the old days', slide copying entailed the use of holders which allowed you to image a full slide and copy 24x36mm transparency to 135 (24x36mm) at 1:1
Today, does someone know of a 1:1/6 reproduction ratio slide holder, so 24x36mm can be copied onto 15 x 22.5mm image area?
Has anyone had success with a APS-C sensor camera? I have a Canon 60D DSLR I'd like to use for scanning 35mm and 120 film, but before investing in a copying system I'd like to know if the resolution of 18MP is sufficient, as I'm not sure I can obtain 1:1 macro with my existing lenses.
.. I have used a Sony 6300 mirrorless (24mp) with a Nikon 60mm micro Nikkor (via a dumb adaptor) to copy a large batch of small, vintage,Has anyone had success with a APS-C sensor camera? I have a Canon 60D DSLR I'd like to use for scanning 35mm and 120 film, but before investing in a copying system I'd like to know if the resolution of 18MP is sufficient, as I'm not sure I can obtain 1:1 macro with my existing lenses.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?