Scan medium format with full frame pixel shift or scanner

[pkr1979]

Hi,

These days Im using a Nikon CoolScan 8000 to scan my medium format film. But I am considering getting a Panasonic S1R with 47 mp and pixel shift possibilities or something similar instead. But before I do something like that I was wondering if someone has gone down that road, and have any opinions on how a good idea this is? What outperforms what?

Cheers
Peter

 

[_T_]

It depends on what format you're scanning and how you scan it. The panasonic has a maximum resolution of 96MP for a single shot, but the coolscan can give you about 116MP from a 6x9 frame, 99MP from a 6x7 frame, 77MP for a 6x6 frame and only 58MP for a 645 frame.

The actual resolution you get from the panasonic using only one shot would also vary depending on the aspect ratio of the frame, but it's possible to get better resolution than anything the coolscan can do by taking multiple overlapping shots of each frame and stitching them together.

I'm not familiar with the pixel shifting performance of the panasonic, some pixel shifting cameras can introduce some artifacts when using that feature.

 

[pkr1979]

Thanks. And isnt the pixels from the scanner larger? It might be overkill for scanning, but this is kind of interesting:

 

[Les Sarile]

Hi,

These days Im using a Nikon CoolScan 8000 to scan my medium format film. But I am considering getting a Panasonic S1R with 47 mp and pixel shift possibilities or something similar instead. But before I do something like that I was wondering if someone has gone down that road, and have any opinions on how a good idea this is? What outperforms what?

Cheers
Peter

Note that I originally conducted this test to see just how good an SMC Pentax-M 50mm F4 macro lens that I bought used for so cheap. I found out then it will not keep me from attaining detail on the film.

I shot a test target using 35mm Kodak Techpan @ ISO25 developed in Kodak Tehnidol and scanned using a Pentax K20D (14.6MP 4672 x 3104) and Nikon D800 (36MP 7360 x 4912) compared to the Coolscan 4000dpi (21.4MP 5669 x 3780) shown below. Resized full target at bottom left and 100% crops from the DSLRs and Coolscan above it. Even though the D800 applies more pixels then a 4000dpi scan, you can see they're almost the same in actual detail achieved but with a slight advantage to the Coolscan. However, as you can see from the 4.5X optical magnification crop on the right, clearly there's much more actual detail captured on this 35mm film then can be resolved by these methods.

Resolution testing my SMC Pentax-M 50mm F4 macro lens by Les DMess, on Flickr

With the Panasonic S1R (47MP 8368 x 5584), it would be expected to achieve more detail then the D800 and Coolscan and would be interesting to see just how much more actual detail can it resolve from this 35mm film. With medium format film, the Coolscan 8000 still applies 4000dpi across the whole area so a 6X7 format will result in 104MP 11000 X 9449 which is substantially more then what the S1R has. And because the aspect ratio of MF is different, the resulting scan from the S1R will effectively be about 2400dpi. Of course you take multiple shots and stitch together for more pixels.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

You won't get better quality than the 8000 unless you stitch multiple frames together. A few years back I did some experiments and to really resolve the grain of the film and get the color accurate you need at least 11,000-14,000 ppi. You can do the math if the Panasonic will let you achieve that. Don't forget the lens has to be pretty spectacular to resolve that level of detail as well. In the end it is up to you to decide whether it is worth the grief. If you want ultimate quality then taking the time to do camera scans and stitching will give it to you.

 

[Les Sarile]

Also, been trying to rent a Nikon D850 (45MP 8256 x 5504) not only to see how much of an improvement in resolution that would be but I also wanted to see the results of its built-in color negative conversion.

 

[pkr1979]

Thanks guys. The new lenses are supposed to match the resolving power of the S1R. If one is using the pixel shift function this should give 187MP. Shouldnt that then be serious competition to the Coolscans 104MP is scanning a 6x7?

 

[isaac7]

In addition to sheer resolving power the possible dynamic range should we worry about dynamic range as well? I would imagine that in theory you could get better retrieval from dark areas of film with a camera setup since you can crank up the light source to whatever brightness that is necessary. That along with exposure bracketing gives you almost unlimited amounts of dynamic range. I have no idea how important that actually is in reality. I used a Polaroid 4000dpi scanner back when my computer actually had a SCSI port on it. I mostly liked the scans but there were definitely some slides that could have used more light.

 

[runswithsizzers]

In addition to sheer resolving power the possible dynamic range should we worry about dynamic range as well? I would imagine that in theory you could get better retrieval from dark areas of film with a camera setup since you can crank up the light source to whatever brightness that is necessary. That along with exposure bracketing gives you almost unlimited amounts of dynamic range. I have no idea how important that actually is in reality.

For negative film, I don't think there is anything to worry about. Personally, I've never seen a negative with a range of densities that came close to challenging what I was able to record either via my Minolta film scanner or the digital sensor of my Fuji camera.

Slide film is definitely more challenging. I have encountered quite a few slides which did have some faint shadow details that my Minolta film scanner was not able to resolve, but which my digital camera was able to record. These troublesome slides were somewhat denser than average, due to moderate underexposure. When projected, I could see details in shadows, but those details were missing in the scans.

I have never used any film scanner other that my old Minolta Dimâge Scan Elite F-2900, so other film scanners may have brighter lights or better options to control the exposure. I used my Dimâge Scan Elite F-2900 with VueScan, which supports a multiple pass option, which may have helped a little with noise in the shadows, but which did not let me adjust the brightness of the lamp or the length of the exposure. Trying to boost the shadows from the scans with software just resulted in more noise.

With the digital camera setup, I was able to use a brighter light and/or a longer exposure to help bring up the shadow details on those dense slides. As I recall, I did not have any particular problem with keeping highlight detail. I may have tried bracketing exposures, but decided there was not enough benefit to justify make that part of my standard workflow.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Thanks guys. The new lenses are supposed to match the resolving power of the S1R. If one is using the pixel shift function this should give 187MP. Shouldnt that then be serious competition to the Coolscans 104MP is scanning a 6x7?

What lenses are you talking about? The lens in the 8000 is spectacular by itself. You'd need a lens like a Printing Nikkor or equivalent to match it, and a bellows to use it. Don't forget about a light source that is appropriate and a copy stand that is super solid as well as a negative carrier that holds the neg perfectly flat, otherwise, why go through all that grief in the first place? Your 8000 takes care of all that for you. Like I mentioned earlier, if you want to get the absolute best, then camera scans can work for you. You seem like you want to spend a lot of money and you won't get much in the way of improvement unless you want to devote the time and energy to do it. I am not saying don't do it. I'm saying be realistic. The 8000 is already damn good.

From my point of view, camera scans for 35mm make sense but as you get larger the other options are simpler and easier to achieve a good result.

 

[pkr1979]

What lenses are you talking about? The lens in the 8000 is spectacular by itself. You'd need a lens like a Printing Nikkor or equivalent to match it, and a bellows to use it. Don't forget about a light source that is appropriate and a copy stand that is super solid as well as a negative carrier that holds the neg perfectly flat, otherwise, why go through all that grief in the first place? Your 8000 takes care of all that for you. Like I mentioned earlier, if you want to get the absolute best, then camera scans can work for you. You seem like you want to spend a lot of money and you won't get much in the way of improvement unless you want to devote the time and energy to do it. I am not saying don't do it. I'm saying be realistic. The 8000 is already damn good.

From my point of view, camera scans for 35mm make sense but as you get larger the other options are simpler and easier to achieve a good result.

The Panasonic 100mm macro and the Sigma 105 macro. I might get the Panasonic 1SR either way - due to other needs. Clearly I can test this if I end up getting it. But if I knew it could replace the Coolscan it would make things easier.

 

[Alexander6x6]

I am curious how you are going to add an infrared channel with the Panasonic.

 

[pkr1979]

I am curious how you are going to add an infrared channel with the Panasonic.

By turning on the infrared switch.

 

[Alexander6x6]

By turning on the infrared switch.

Just help me to understand: you are talking about the camera Panasonic S1R to be used for the film scanning, right?
Where do you have the infrared switch? On the camera? As far as I know the camera sensor must be completely converted to detect the infrared rays.

 

[Les Sarile]

Thanks guys. The new lenses are supposed to match the resolving power of the S1R. If one is using the pixel shift function this should give 187MP. Shouldnt that then be serious competition to the Coolscans 104MP is scanning a 6x7?

That would really be something! I looked at DPREVIEW and a couple others but haven't found test results showing this?

 

[pkr1979]

Just help me to understand: you are talking about the camera Panasonic S1R to be used for the film scanning, right?
Where do you have the infrared switch? On the camera? As far as I know the camera sensor must be completely converted to detect the infrared rays.

There isnt - there is no infrared channel when scanning with that camera.

 

[pkr1979]

That would really be something! I looked at DPREVIEW and a couple others but haven't found test results showing this?

If I am not mistaken data is presented for the Sigma (dont know where). Do not know if there is for the Panasonic lens.

 

[Alexander6x6]

There isnt - there is no infrared channel when scanning with that camera.

Then tell me how it is better than Nikon Coolscan where you do have the infrared channel for removing the dust from the scanned film.

 

[pkr1979]

Then tell me how it is better than Nikon Coolscan where you do have the infrared channel for removing the dust from the scanned film.

I'll just brush it off before I scan.

 

[Alexander6x6]

I'll just brush it off before I scan.

Having Coolscan 9000 I can tell you that with some films it will not help much.

In general, I don't understand your point. Why bother with an extremely complicated workflow (already described above) when you already have one of the best machines for scanning?

If I were you, I would also be skeptical of the fairy tales about super-duper lenses, simply because they are not designed for scanning.

 

[pkr1979]

I'm familiar with dslr-scanning, filscanners and drumscanners - and I dont find digitizing film with dslrs extremely complicated. Neither avoiding dust. The question isnt so much regarded to workflow, but rather how the end results compare.

 

[Les Sarile]

If I am not mistaken data is presented for the Sigma (dont know where). Do not know if there is for the Panasonic lens.

187MP would indeed be great. The only one I found states actually detail achieved is between 90 - 120MP which is still very good. After adjusting for the MF ratio, it would still be less than the Coolscan.

S1R pixel shifting - www.photomacrography.net https://share.google/EWS2wxYmTOWQENazV

 

[pkr1979]

187MP would indeed be great. The only one I found states actually detail achieved is between 90 - 120MP which is still very good. After adjusting for the MF ratio, it would still be less than the Coolscan.

S1R pixel shifting - www.photomacrography.net https://share.google/EWS2wxYmTOWQENazV

Thanks - The link doesnt seem to work.

 

[koraks]

fairy tales about super-duper lenses, simply because they are not designed for scanning.

The requirements for scanning align pretty well with requirements for macro photography in general. Besides, optical tests like resolution tests resemble a real world scanning scenario much more so than photographing bugs in the backyard.

As to ICE, keep in mind that it's only useful on chromogenic film to begin with.

 

[pkr1979]

187MP would indeed be great. The only one I found states actually detail achieved is between 90 - 120MP which is still very good. After adjusting for the MF ratio, it would still be less than the Coolscan.

S1R pixel shifting - www.photomacrography.net https://share.google/EWS2wxYmTOWQENazV

Also, if one is doing two shots and stitch you'll get pretty good resolution. And still quicker than scanning.