Lenses for Scanning (film digitizing)

[silvergelatin]

Looking for a new lens for scanning 35mm film on a full frame Sony. Since I started using an RGB light source, my Sigma 105 Art lens sometimes shows color vignetting, and generally requires a lot of software correction, so I’m looking for something more optically compatible. I tried a 55/2.8 Micro Nikkor and a 60mm f4 Rodagon (non-WA). The latter was flatter, but neither is as snappy as the Sigma.

Ideally, I would grab an Apo Rodagon D or Apo Componon, but since those are unobtainium where I live, I’m looking for alternatives. Has anyone used the Voigtlander 65mm Apo Lanthar for scanning? I know it is reputed to be excellent in general, but scanning is a special set of constraints. I know it needs some extension to get to 1:1, but that’s no problem. How is the flatness? Any quirks? Other ideas?

 

[250swb]

With the 60mm Nikkor D you get 1+1 reproduction and also a great micro lens anyway. But an AF lens is best for speed of work.

 

[silvergelatin]

With the 60mm Nikkor D you get 1+1 reproduction and also a great micro lens anyway. But an AF lens is best for speed of work.

Another user has had RGB ray angle issues with that one, but i haven't tested it myself on a Sony sensor. Currently testing a Fujinon EX 105 (waiting on additional extension tubes), which I expect to do pretty well. But still chasing the elusive ideal for the moment...

 

[xkaes]

Since you are looking for around 1:1 reproduction, there are a ton of process/copy/macro lenses to choose from. A lot depends on if you want AF and NEW. I use manual focusing Minolta and Tominon bellows and process lenses on a Sony a900 -- usually a Tominon 75mm f4.5 for FF 35mm film. You'll get a lot more flexibility from a bellows than extension tubes, but that usually means losing AF and auto-aperture control. You'll get the best results from a lens designed for 1:1 reproduction, and stopping down. Enlarging lenses are not designed for 1:1 reproduction.

 

[MattKing]

Thread title tweaked, to head off those who might think this thread is about the lenses that are inside film scanners.
The argument about whether or not to use the term "scanning" to describe the process of creating a digital file using a camera with a single stationary sensor with a lens in front of it will no doubt continue for decades ....

 

[bfilm]

If you are looking for something like the Rodenstock lenses you mention, maybe you can get a better price in Japan on the Nikon Rayfact IL series industrial lenses, which are largely the same as the old EL-Nikkor 50mm F2.8N and 63mm F2.8N enlargement lenses.

https://www.nikon.com/business/industrial-lenses/lineup/il/

They don't have numbered aperture markings, but they do have marks and click stops, so you can count the aperture steps. You can use these on the darkroom enlarger in the same way.

 

[Ardpatrick]

Since you are looking for around 1:1 reproduction, there are a ton of process/copy/macro lenses to choose from. A lot depends on if you want AF and NEW. I use manual focusing Minolta and Tominon bellows and process lenses on a Sony a900 -- usually a Tominon 75mm f4.5 for FF 35mm film. You'll get a lot more flexibility from a bellows than extension tubes, but that usually means losing AF and auto-aperture control. You'll get the best results from a lens designed for 1:1 reproduction, and stopping down. Enlarging lenses are not designed for 1:1 reproduction.

I have tested a Micro-Nikkor 105 AF-D, a Micro-Nikkor 60AF-D, and a Rodenstock Apo-Rodagon N 80 reverse mounted, on a Nikon PB-4 bellows with the slide repro attachment, at 1:1 with a D800. The first issue I had was finding an old slide that was truly sharp enough to test any of these optics. After that I arrived at the ranking to confuse Xkaes knowledgeable advice. The 105 was sharpest, followed closely by the enlarger lens, and then a little way behind was the 60mm. But the 60mm is by far the easiest to use in this bellows set-up and more than adequate for my soft old slides.

I guess my point is that comparing optics based on specifications, or reputation assumes ideal conditions in a task that brutally exposes any failing of focus, alignment, stability, illumination, flare control etc. Get all that just perfect and the search for the best optics can begin to really matter. Even at that there’s the variation in individual lenses from copy to copy, and the fact that most of the lenses discussed on these forums for film capture are used, often decades old. The number of variables involved leads me to the conclusion that one cannot truly hypothesise, but rather one has to directly test lenses against each other on the specific set up in use.

 

[xkaes]

Ease of use is always a consideration, and when digitizing film there's always the advantage of "post-processing improvements" through software to sharpen up the "soft old slides".

 

[silvergelatin]

Since you are looking for around 1:1 reproduction, there are a ton of process/copy/macro lenses to choose from. A lot depends on if you want AF and NEW. I use manual focusing Minolta and Tominon bellows and process lenses on a Sony a900 -- usually a Tominon 75mm f4.5 for FF 35mm film. You'll get a lot more flexibility from a bellows than extension tubes, but that usually means losing AF and auto-aperture control. You'll get the best results from a lens designed for 1:1 reproduction, and stopping down. Enlarging lenses are not designed for 1:1 reproduction.

I am on the lookout for process lenses that are easy to adapt to a normal camera and not obscenely expensive. It's not that easy to find, unfortunately.

 

[xkaes]

That's one of the reasons why I use Tominon lenses. I have 135mm down to 17mm and have never spent more that $40 for any of them. They are frequently sold in sets, but there are lots of other brands as well, but like other types of lenses, some have "cult" prices.

The Tominon lenses I use have a 40mm rear thread, so I use a 40mm-to-39mm adapter or 40mm-to-42mm adapter. That makes it easy to adapt to anything.

 

[silvergelatin]

If you are looking for something like the Rodenstock lenses you mention, maybe you can get a better price in Japan on the Nikon Rayfact IL series industrial lenses, which are largely the same as the old EL-Nikkor 50mm F2.8N and 63mm F2.8N enlargement lenses.

https://www.nikon.com/business/industrial-lenses/lineup/il/

They don't have numbered aperture markings, but they do have marks and click stops, so you can count the aperture steps. You can use these on the darkroom enlarger in the same way.

My understanding is that the IL series is optimized for much lower magnification, so might not be ideal for 35mm.

 

[Dan Fromm]

I am on the lookout for process lenses that are easy to adapt to a normal camera and not obscenely expensive. It's not that easy to find, unfortunately.

You want a short one. Finding one may be difficult. Adapters are the easiest part.

50/9, 75/9, 100/10 and 135/10 Apo Saphir come to mind, also 55/9 and 135/9 Repro Clarons; 4 in/9.5 Apo Artar; 150/9 G Claron and Apo Ronar; and 75/8 Apo Skopar. Apo Skopars are prone to separations, beware.

 

[silvergelatin]

That's one of the reasons why I use Tominon lenses. I have 135mm down to 17mm and have never spent more that $40 for any of them. They are frequently sold in sets, but there are lots of other brands as well, but like other types of lenses, some have "cult" prices.

The Tominon lenses I use have a 40mm rear thread, so I use a 40mm-to-39mm adapter or 40mm-to-42mm adapter. That makes it easy to adapt to anything.

I read that the 105 is the one that stands out for this kind of work. I may pick one up if I come across a good deal.

 

[silvergelatin]

You want a short one. Finding one may be difficult. Adapters are the easiest part.

50/9, 75/9, 100/10 and 135/10 Apo Saphir come to mind, also 55/9 and 135/9 Repro Clarons; 4 in/9.5 Apo Artar; 150/9 G Claron and Apo Ronar; and 75/8 Apo Skopar. Apo Skopars are prone to separations, beware.

Yeah, I have seen a few Clarons around, but hey are usually in 150-240mm range. That's a bit uncomfortable, as I would like to stay at or under 105mm.

 

[xkaes]

The shorter focal length lenses are harder to find, but there seems to be less demand for them -- and that's the good news. As long as your bellows is long enough, longer lenses are not a big problem. With a 100mm process lens you'll need 200mm of space to get to 1:1.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Yeah, I have seen a few Clarons around, but hey are usually in 150-240mm range. That's a bit uncomfortable, as I would like to stay at or under 105mm.

Short Apo Saphirs show up, but not often, on eBay.fr.

 

[silvergelatin]

The shorter focal length lenses are harder to find, but there seems to be less demand for them -- and that's the good news. As long as your bellows is long enough, longer lenses are not a big problem. With a 100mm process lens you'll need 200mm of space to get to 1:1.

Yeah, I’m actually short on extension tubes right now to use this Fujinon. Waiting on an order. My copy stand is relatively small, so 105 is really the practical limit before I start worrying about stability.

 

[silvergelatin]

So has anyone tried the 65 Apo Lanthar? I am curious about its corner performance. There is an article about on the closeup photography site, but no real mention of flatness or comparisons to process lenses. I’m really curious about this one because it is available and convenient

 

[250swb]

Another user has had RGB ray angle issues with that one, but i haven't tested it myself on a Sony sensor. Currently testing a Fujinon EX 105 (waiting on additional extension tubes), which I expect to do pretty well. But still chasing the elusive ideal for the moment...

Regarding the Nikkor 60mm D, it's hard to imagine a perfect setup leading to 'RGB ray angle issues' but if it helps the lens does work on a Nikon Z7, and who should make the sensor for the Nikon Z7? Sony of course!

 

[thinkbrown]

I've been bouncing back and forth between a Minolta CE Rokkor 80mm enlarging lens on bellows and a Konica Hexanon GRII 105mm process lens. The Konica is sharper but it's much harder to work with due to the focal length. Both are miles ahead of the Micro Nikkor 105mm af-d I was using previously.

 

[xkaes]

Yeah, I’m actually short on extension tubes right now to use this Fujinon. Waiting on an order. My copy stand is relatively small, so 105 is really the practical limit before I start worrying about stability.

There are a couple of Tominon 105mm f4.5 on EBAY right now. Both have shutters.

 

[xkaes]

I've been bouncing back and forth between a Minolta CE Rokkor 80mm enlarging lens on bellows and a Konica Hexanon GRII 105mm process lens. The Konica is sharper but it's much harder to work with due to the focal length. Both are miles ahead of the Micro Nikkor 105mm af-d I was using previously.

I've only used the Minolta CE Rokkor 80mm f5.6 for enlarging, but Minolta made a special reverse adapter for it's CE lenses -- impossible to get, but easy to fabricate -- so they imagined that people would want to do it.

FYI, a 55mm EMPTY filter ring fits perfectly on the front of any CE lens -- with a touch of silicone sealant to keep it in place.

 

[thinkbrown]

I've only used the Minolta CE Rokkor 80mm f5.6 for enlarging, but Minolta made a special reverse adapter for it's CE lenses -- impossible to get, but easy to fabricate -- so they imagined that people would want to do it.

FYI, a 55mm EMPTY filter ring fits perfectly on the front of any CE lens -- with a touch of silicone sealant to keep it in place.

I've been using it mounted in standard orientation because for the most part I'm scanning things larger than my sensor. My understanding is that I may gain some sharpness reversing it for half frame or 16mm scans but I haven't made an adapter for it yet.

 

[xkaes]

I've never seen one of the Minolta CE reverse adapters, and don't know how they work. For some reason, Minolta CE lenses do not have front lens threads, but 55mm filters fit over the front. I've attached empty 55mm filter rings onto the front of mine -- with dabs of silicone sealant to keep them inn place -- so that I can use filters when enlarging, such as Minolta Portrayer filters

When reversing Minolta CE lenses you have to cover up the two light-pipes -- temporarily -- to avoid light leaks. The same is true for other enlarging lenses with light-pipes, such as the Fujinon EX lenses,

 

[250swb]

The simple answer to everything is to buy or already own a 1+1 macro lens, job done, adapter is in the post, light source sorted and a copy stand enabled. How to make it more complicated probably just read the next post.