Print quality after dslr scan

[Laci Toth]

Hi all,

I’m planning to scan black and white negatives with a 24mp dslr and an SMC Takumar 55mm/1.8 on bellows. I’m wondering of the print quality and I only want to enlarge them in 6x8 inch size.
I’ve a Pentax Spotmatic and a Pentax 6x7 as well so I’m interested in the outcome of the scan and prints in both formats.
I’ll shoot in raw to achieve the best results.
I do not own a printer so will send them over to a lab.

 

[Gary NJ]

It depends on the quality of your negative and DSLR "scan". It's difficult to provide a definitive answer without seeing the finished file that you created. Maybe you can post it here? I print from scanned negatives and achieve better results that I could in the darkroom, but that's just me. Others will get better end results from the wet print process.

 

[Lachlan Young]

SMC Takumar 55mm/1.8

You really want a lens with a flatter field than this - a 50mm macro or similar.

 

[gorbas]

or enlarging lens

 

[Laci Toth]

So the current setup is the following (though I'm of course ready to modify it if it’ll lead to a solution):
-Manfrotto tripod with a ball head
-two negative carrier (35mm and 6x9)
-Vorsatz M42 bellows
-SMC Takumar 55mm 1.8
-iPhone and a plexiglass on the top (though I'm thinking about getting a slim light panel)
-and a currently not purchased DSLR (as I have a M42 to F Mount adaptor in my drawer anyway I'm thinking about getting a Nikon D3200/3300)
At the moment I've tried the Takumar on the bellows (fully closed) and attached it to the Spotmatic just to check the outcome. It works and covers the entire frame when I look through the viewfinder. The Takumar is a nice piece of glass I love it but it failed in this setup and I've tried it reversed though I knew that it might be worse and yes; in both cases the edges are blurred. Even and the overall quality was somewhat worse, knowing what this lens is capable of otherwise.
I'm thinking about getting an enlarger lens but I also have to think about the 6x7 negs as well so I might get an 80mm enlarging lens or a dedicated macro. I want even sharpness of course.
I don’t know if the 80mm enlarging lens is a good idea or which macro would be good for both formats/distances but that’s the reason I composed these lines to get some help to setup the fun.
Thanks in advance!

 

[MattKing]

You may find it challenging to get the entire 35mm negative into a crop sensor (D3200/3300) frame if you are using a bellows and an 80mm lens. Even a 50mm lens may be too long.
The thickness of the bellows leads to higher magnification than you will want, unless you use a lens that matches better with the size of the sensor.
A 50mm enlarging lens may very well work with the bellows, a crop sensor camera and 6x7 originals.

 

[gorbas]

Sorry Matt, you are totally wrong here.
To copy 24x36mm negative with APSC sensor, bellows, 80mm lens works like charm. Problem is with 50 or 55mm lens, bellows and APSC. Magnification is to high and you will be able to copy just part of the negative. If you use FF sensor then you are going to be fine with 50 or 55mm lens (depending of your bellows minimum thickens)

 

[Laci Toth]

Sorry Matt, you are totally wrong here.
To copy 24x36mm negative with APSC sensor, bellows, 80mm lens works like charm. Problem is with 50 or 55mm lens, bellows and APSC. Magnification is to high and you will be able to copy just part of the negative. If you use FF sensor then you are going to be fine with 50 or 55mm lens (depending of your bellows minimum thickens)

=)
So who’s right now?
I’d need the sure thing.
I’ve spent an hour searching for 50mm enlarging lens after Matt’s response. I’m happy to take my time to check 80mm versions as well but then how to decide?

 

[gorbas]

Laci, I'm using set up with Nikon D7000 to copy 24x36 for more than 5 years now. I'm talking from my experience. This is my set up from 3 years ago, kind of midpoint. A few things changed since. One significant thing is, I changed lens to 75mm, no practical difference in the set up. You see camera model, you see full frame on the monitor and 80mm enlarging lens on bellows, what else I need to prove to you? Back in the film days Nikon designed bellows and Negative holders to be able to do 1:1 with Micro nikkor 55mm at infinity with bellows at minimum extension and it is still valid with full frame sensor.

 

[Laci Toth]

Laci, I'm using set up with Nikon D7000 to copy 24x36 for more than 5 years now. I'm talking from my experience. This is my set up from 3 years ago, kind of midpoint. A few things changed since. One significant thing is, I changed lens to 75mm, no practical difference in the set up. You see camera model, you see full frame on the monitor and 80mm enlarging lens on bellows, what else I need to prove to you? Back in the film days Nikon designed bellows and Negative holders to be able to do 1:1 with Micro nikkor 55mm at infinity with bellows at minimum extension and it is still valid with full frame sensor.
View attachment 250468

Many thanks for bringing me closer to a solution!
So if I understand it right the full frame goes well with the 55mm Micro Nikkor and the smaller format with a 80mm enlarging lens?
If it’s true will I be able to use the 80mm enlarging lens for 35mm and 6x7 as well?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

You should be fine if you'll figure out how to get decent picture of the negative with DSLR rig and also make it usable for the lab by post processing it. I'm avoiding it due to cumbersome setups like above. I have two not very expensive for sufficient scanners instead.
The good thing about good lab, it is next to impossible find difference from DR print and lab inkjet print.

 

[MattKing]

Sorry Matt, you are totally wrong here.
To copy 24x36mm negative with APSC sensor, bellows, 80mm lens works like charm. Problem is with 50 or 55mm lens, bellows and APSC. Magnification is to high and you will be able to copy just part of the negative. If you use FF sensor then you are going to be fine with 50 or 55mm lens (depending of your bellows minimum thickens)

I think the problem is due to the minimum "flange" distance that my bellows imposes. With my 50 mm macro lens mounted directly on a crop sensor body, I could achieve the smaller magnification needed.
But I did find with my experiments that longer (non-macro) lenses seemed to make it worse.
And notionally, it seems hard to get my mind around how a longer lens, designed to cover a smaller field of view in front of it, and a larger field of coverage behind it, can give you less magnification than a shorter lens.

 

[gorbas]

So if I understand it right the full frame goes well with the 55mm Micro Nikkor and the smaller format with a 80mm enlarging lens?
If it’s true will I be able to use the 80mm enlarging lens for 35mm and 6x7 as well?

For me this setup is ideal for 35mm negatives. For 6x6 negatives I have totally different setup.
If you do not use bellows you mention and use extension tubes you will be use to use 50mm lens for your copy process. You will need to experiment with length of the tubes and that is reason why bellows is easier to use.
Question is how are you going to line up negative and camera to be perfectly parallel and keep it that way during the process? From experience I can tell you it's very hard and that is reason why I picked Nikon PB-5.
Yes, you can use one lens for both negative formats.

 

[gorbas]

Well, Matt, it works!

 

[MattKing]

Unfortunately I have been unable to source the adapter that would allow me to mount an M39 enlarger lens to my Olympus OM mount bellows.

 

[gorbas]

M39 to M42 + M42 to OM will do it. Direct adapters from M39 to Camera mount are not that common.

 

[Laci Toth]

For me this setup is ideal for 35mm negatives. For 6x6 negatives I have totally different setup.
If you do not use bellows you mention and use extension tubes you will be use to use 50mm lens for your copy process. You will need to experiment with length of the tubes and that is reason why bellows is easier to use.
Question is how are you going to line up negative and camera to be perfectly parallel and keep it that way during the process? From experience I can tell you it's very hard and that is reason why I picked Nikon PB-5.
Yes, you can use one lens for both negative formats.

I’ve bellows so I can mount the lens on it, the other end is for the dslr, all these on a tripod the negative is in a negative carrier which sits on a light table and to assure that it’s flat and the camera also I use a spirit level.
But you said for medium format you use a different setup. I’ve to ask what is it because I’ve be sure that a setup works before I invest.
I assume the 80mm lens is for the 35mm negatives and a 50mm lens would be for medium format. Just guessing. Or by using bellows will the 80mm enlarging lens work for both formats?

 

[Laci Toth]

You should be fine if you'll figure out how to get decent picture of the negative with DSLR rig and also make it usable for the lab by post processing it. I'm avoiding it due to cumbersome setups like above. I have two not very expensive for sufficient scanners instead.
The good thing about good lab, it is next to impossible find difference from DR print and lab inkjet print.

I’d love to have a decent scanner. But as I’ve read so many reviews it’s risky mostly because of the software. Especially the new ones. To send the negs to a lab is just way too expensive. But it’s still not out of the game but I might give this setup a go first if I can gather up enough info about a setup which surely works.

 

[138S]

Hi all,

I’m planning to scan black and white negatives with a 24mp dslr and an SMC Takumar 55mm/1.8 on bellows. I’m wondering of the print quality and I only want to enlarge them in 6x8 inch size.
I’ve a Pentax Spotmatic and a Pentax 6x7 as well so I’m interested in the outcome of the scan and prints in both formats.
I’ll shoot in raw to achieve the best results.
I do not own a printer so will send them over to a lab.

For a 6x8" print you require some 6x300x8x300 pixels, so around 4.5 effective MPix, at some 8 effective MPix quality will be total. The 24 MPix camera is to deliver around true 14 MPix effectve, but as FF/APSC and 6x7 aspect ratio does not match you are to loss a share of the capability.

So a single DSLR shot should be enough to scan a MF shot for a 8" print.


Your lens is not optimized for very close work nor for field flatness and zero distortion, probably you'll have to stop a little more than what would be optimal with flat-macro work lens, and the smaller aperture will limit peak performance because diffraction, but probably this won't be much an issue because you have other practical limitations. If your sensor is APSC size then you are to use the center of image circle so the lens won't use the corners. In that case you may trim the APS frame with a cardboard in the back of the lens to prevent flare from the excessive image circle.

Check the corners and find what aperture delivers the good balance and also ensure a good alignment. Also you always may stitch some crops for greater enlargements.

 

[reddesert]

I think the problem is due to the minimum "flange" distance that my bellows imposes. With my 50 mm macro lens mounted directly on a crop sensor body, I could achieve the smaller magnification needed.
But I did find with my experiments that longer (non-macro) lenses seemed to make it worse.
And notionally, it seems hard to get my mind around how a longer lens, designed to cover a smaller field of view in front of it, and a larger field of coverage behind it, can give you less magnification than a shorter lens.

A longer lens gives you less magnification at fixed extension. The bellows imposes a minimum extension, so with the bellows compressed all the way, you get less magnification with an 80mm lens than with a 50mm. Roughly, to get 1:1.5 magnification, for the 1.5 crop factor sensor, one needs:
- lens-subject distance = 1.5 x lens-camera distance
- lens-camera distance = (1 + 1/1.5) x focal length = 5/3 x focal length.

This is an approximation since real camera lenses aren't thin lenses, but roughly you need an extension of 2/3 x focal length past infinity. If you have a bellows + slide copier setup, you may find that it's not long enough to get the slide far enough away to use a 80-100mm lens.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I had some beginners luck with using a Fuji X-T2 and the Fuji 60mm macro lens to photograph negatives, but have now realised that trying to increase quality from my initial experiments is / will be more challenging. Photrio user 'NortheastPhotographic' has some useful experience with this approach and his Panasonic S1R camera that can do multi-shot exposures to give better reproduction quality.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I’d love to have a decent scanner. But as I’ve read so many reviews it’s risky mostly because of the software. Especially the new ones. To send the negs to a lab is just way too expensive. But it’s still not out of the game but I might give this setup a go first if I can gather up enough info about a setup which surely works.

I use software which came with not old Epson and current Plustek. No problems.
Just takes time to learn and understand how to get maximum from it. Epson scan is the easiest and very effective software.
In the opposite, with old scanners and thier software most easiest solution, it seems, is to buy matching those oldies computers and same vintage OS.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

In the opposite, with old scanners and thier software most easiest solution, it seems, is to buy matching those oldies computers and same vintage OS.

For logistical reasons I'm currently running my Coolscan 9000 with NikonScan on a PowerBook G4. However until recently I had been using VueScan on a more recent computer that suffered hardware failure, and found the modern software worked fine - in conjunction with ColorPerfect for the negative conversions.

 

[markjwyatt]

I have been copying 35 mm B&W negatives on a Durst slide copier with my Fujifilm XT-2 (ASPC). A 75 mm enlarging lens works well- I can get the full frame and the bellows is able to accommodate the focus. I just did some half frame negatives and used a 50 mm enlarging lens successfully.

 

[Laci Toth]

I have been copying 35 mm B&W negatives on a Durst slide copier with my Fujifilm XT-2 (ASPC). A 75 mm enlarging lens works well- I can get the full frame and the bellows is able to accommodate the focus. I just did some half frame negatives and used a 50 mm enlarging lens successfully.

Are those photos on your media scanned by this method? Or if not all then can you show me examples? Thanks!