Nikon PB-6 on a mirrorless digital camera: reproduction ratios change?

[Dan Fromm]

Regarding one point of post #47

". . . apparently the PS-6 doesn't have an integral bellows. What was Nikon thinking?"

The Nikon PS-6 has an integral bellows shade to keep room light from interfering with film or slide copying. To open it, you’d grasp the rearmost frame and pull rearward to defeat the two magnet latches at the sides that normally keep the bellows shade closed. It opens most easily by prying open one side at a time.

You can see this in the following video at the 1:15 time.

Nikon PS-6 slide negative copy and lightroom editing - YouTube

Here’s a video about using the PB-6 bellows unit.

Thanks for the clarification.

I went to 1:15 of the video. It shows nothing like what you mentioned. I think you made a typo, the location is ~ 21.00.

 

[Ian C]

It's in the first link.

This one.



The relevant scene starts at about 1 minute 12 seconds.

The time indication at the bottom left in the video starts at 0:00.

When it reaches the 1 minute, it shows 1:00. The one minute 15 second point shows 1:15.

 

[fdonadio]

The PS-4 has a bellows at the rear. The bellows' rear clips into a 55 MicroNikkor's filter threads to keep out stray light. What in your rig keeps the darkness between lens and PS-6 slide holder in? I've checked the PB-6 manual and apparently the PS-6 doesn't have an integral bellows. What was Nikon thinking?

The PS-6 does have a bellows, I just can’t clip it to the El-Nikkor or the Componon, as the lens diameter is too small.

To avoid stray light, I turn the room lights off. The model light on my Godox makes it easy to see the original.

But I don’t agree it’s surreal at all. Except for having to use the extension tubes for the 80mm, it’s pretty much the normal way.

 

[fdonadio]

Insightful, but the OP was asking about using a Nikon Z mirrorless camera, which has a different native lens mount, so the camera and therefore the subsequent accessories does matter doesn't it?

Well… I have no obligation to use Z lenses. Nikon even markets the FTZ adapter —I would even say heavily — as a way to use older lenses. Which I do, as I use the same lenses to shoot film on my F2AS, FM2, F3 and F4.

Also, using the PS-6 for holding framed slides and film strips is much easier than using a copy stand setup.

I don’t see anything wrong here, except the problems I noted extensively in my previous posts.

 

[250swb]

Well… I have no obligation to use Z lenses. Nikon even markets the FTZ adapter —I would even say heavily — as a way to use older lenses. Which I do, as I use the same lenses to shoot film on my F2AS, FM2, F3 and F4.

Also, using the PS-6 for holding framed slides and film strips is much easier than using a copy stand setup.

I don’t see anything wrong here, except the problems I noted extensively in my previous posts.

I think you must have misread what I wrote. To put it into a nutshell, with an FTZ adapter on your Z camera you only need a lens that can do 1+1 which is the F mount 60mm AF-D which is NOT a Z lens, it's an F lens. With a 55mm Nikkor you are only adding the other elements you need to make it 1+1, such as extra bellows or extension tubes, so your 'kit' becomes needlessly more complicated (and the 60mm AF-D is better than the 55mm anyway). On the front of the lens mount anything you like, a slide copier or a negative copier (the same thing really in a good setup).

 

[fdonadio]

I think you must have misread what I wrote. To put it into a nutshell, with an FTZ adapter on your Z camera you only need a lens that can do 1+1 which is the F mount 60mm AF-D which is NOT a Z lens, it's an F lens. With a 55mm Nikkor you are only adding the other elements you need to make it 1+1, such as extra bellows or extension tubes, so your 'kit' becomes needlessly more complicated (and the 60mm AF-D is better than the 55mm anyway). On the front of the lens mount anything you like, a slide copier or a negative copier (the same thing really in a good setup).

Oh, sorry, I see. It’s a different way of doing it.

But, again, bellows are in fact used for microphotography and reproduction work. It’s what they’re designed for.

I don’t agree that having “less gear” equates to better or easier results. In fact, using bellows is quite easy and, once its parts are locked in place, they don’t move easily. So, each setup has its advantages.

If I had used the 55mm Micro-Nikkor with the same setup, this thread would probably never have existed. I would have been happily digitizing my negatives and slides from day one.

 

[250swb]

Oh, sorry, I see. It’s a different way of doing it.

But, again, bellows are in fact used for microphotography and reproduction work. It’s what they’re designed for.

I don’t agree that having “less gear” equates to better or easier results. In fact, using bellows is quite easy and, once its parts are locked in place, they don’t move easily. So, each setup has its advantages.

If I had used the 55mm Micro-Nikkor with the same setup, this thread would probably never have existed. I would have been happily digitizing my negatives and slides from day one.

If you had used a 1+1 60mm AF-D directly on your FTZ adapter this thread need never have existed. It's always good to compare camera setups and discuss things, but starting on a journey isn't about how many unnecessary things you can get into your backpack. I'm not saying you can't do what you need to do with the bellows or extension tubes people have suggested, just that with a Nikon Z and an FTZ adapter there is no reason for added complication given there is an obvious lens that shortcuts all the workarounds to get 1+1 magnification.

 

[Dan Fromm]

If you had used a 1+1 60mm AF-D directly on your FTZ adapter this thread need never have existed. It's always good to compare camera setups and discuss things, but starting on a journey isn't about how many unnecessary things you can get into your backpack. I'm not saying you can't do what you need to do with the bellows or extension tubes people have suggested, just that with a Nikon Z and an FTZ adapter there is no reason for added complication given there is an obvious lens that shortcuts all the workarounds to get 1+1 magnification.

Hmm. Isn't a slide holder needed, also something between it and lens to keep the dark in?

 

[250swb]

Hmm. Isn't a slide holder needed, also something between it and lens to keep the dark in?

Why are you asking me? Knock yourself out, add a slide holder, or mount the camera on a copy stand and copy negatives, or put the camera on a tripod and do some 1+1 closeup work.

 

[fdonadio]

starting on a journey isn't about how many unnecessary things you can get into your backpack.

Looking from this standpoint, the FTZ adapter wouldn’t be needed if I went for a Z-series lens that does 1:1.

And, yes, something would be needed to hold the slide/negative in front of the camera and parallel with the focal plane.

You can go ahead and digress endlessly about the simplicity, lightness, compactness, portability or whatever else you want to say about your proposed setup. Which, by the way, is a valid solution.

It’s just that my problem has been solved already, so I see no point in me to keep talking about it.

Thanks for your input, anyway.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Why are you asking me? Knock yourself out, add a slide holder, or mount the camera on a copy stand and copy negatives, or put the camera on a tripod and do some 1+1 closeup work.

I keep asking you because Nikon has several solutions to the problem. You don't seem to be aware of them.

As far as I know there are no third-party slide holders like Nikon's ES-1 or ES-2. If I'm mistaken, please correct me.

 

[Ardpatrick]

It’s not a mystery. The 50 mm enlarger lens is simply too far from the image plane making the magnification too great.

Try an 80 mm enlarger lens. For example, an 80 mm f/5.6N EL Nikkor has an 55 mm flange distance, while the 50 mm f.2.8N has a 43 mm flange distance.

An 80 mm lens achieves 1:1 magnification when its rear nodal point is about 160 mm from the image plane (sensor). The flange distance of the 80 mm f5.6N EL Nikkor is 55 mm. So that places the lens flange about 135 mm from the sensor. That should be easily done with the PB4 or PB6 bellows unit. Other 80 mm enlarging lenses will have similar dimensions.

I posted earlier in this thread - and a lot seems to have happened since. Several viable solutions have been offered to what turns out to be quite a technical task.

Fwiw, I have a PB-4 bellows & PS-4 film holder. I've tried a range of enlarger lenses and micro-nikkors, and the most convenient, and effective option for this bellows is the Micro-Nikkor 60mm. As stated above, its great advantage over the 55mm lens is that it can focus to 1:1 ratio, whereas the 55mm cannot. But on the right bellows, the 55mm should work fine.

After reading this thread today, I very quickly took out the bellows and set it up with my D800, and 60mm lens. I just used a clip on desk lamp as a temporary light source. I would normally use a flash gun. I could easily shoot a 35mm slide, albeit a lousy out of focus slide, but it was what I had to hand. The first image attached is the rig set for very slightly wider than 1:1 to include the full slide frame. The second image shows the setup where the 35mm is significantly cropped into, producing a reproduction of greater than 1:1 ratio. That's the lens basically front pressed to the PS-4 holder. Btw I use a 62-52mm step-down ring to allow the PS-4 in-built compendium shade attach to the micro-nikkor's 62mm filter thread.

I think one of the hidden issues the OP has encountered is that the PB-6 bellows is clearly inferior to the PB-4 version. Its vintage is probably from the same era as the Micro-Nikkor 60mm (1990's), which is more flexible than the older 55mm version. I wonder if the 60mm lens and the PB-6 bellows were designed to better combine, whereas the more flexible PB-4 bellows could better combine with the equally older 55mm Micro-Nikkor. It's just a guess, but my sense is that Nikon were generally very diligent about how these accessories functioned together. Retrospectively combining equipment from different generations creates it own complexities, which this thread clearly evidences.

... And hey Presto, yet again I cannot post the images to Photrio! This happens every time. My three jpegs are 420KB, 383KB, and 104KB. I tried dragging, attaching, and every conceivable variant of the .jpg extension! I get messages saying the files are too big(!) or that they are not recognised as images(!)

I guess nothing's easy...

So here's a dropbox link:

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

 

[MattKing]

Here are @Ardpatrick 's images.
The first one:

The second one:

And the third one - apologies if I've screwed up the order:

I don't know what is getting in the way of your uploads @Ardpatrick - feel free to Start a Conversation if you want to pursue this outside the thread.

 

[250swb]

I keep asking you because Nikon has several solutions to the problem. You don't seem to be aware of them.

As far as I know there are no third-party slide holders like Nikon's ES-1 or ES-2. If I'm mistaken, please correct me.

The OP's question was how to get 1+1 reproduction with a Nikon Z camera, I answered that by giving the simplest solution, a 60mm AF-D and an FTZ adapter (so NOT a 55mm micro). I know what I do with a micro lens on a Nikon Z (copy negatives) but what you or anybody else wants to add in front of the lens is a personal matter which is why I didn't answer it. If I wanted to copy a slide I'd put the slide into a suitable carrier and point the camera at it (using a light source and copy stand). Given I copy multiple formats going all out to make a dedicated 35mm copy setup is pointless, but if I was copying a vast archive of slides I may look for an old Bowens IIllumitran. I don't even use slide film so why you assume I'm supposed give you all the answers I have no idea?