Scanning with a digital medium format compared to full frame DSLR

[etn]

Further thoughts: I find that 1:2 is probably sufficient for 6x6 film material. With 35mm, a higher magnification is certainly recommended. At 1:1 on a 100c sensor, 35mm format provides about 60 Mpixels.

The next question is, which resolution is necessary to extract "everything" (so to speak) out of 35mm film... is 60 Mpixels overkill? (I have no answer to this question)

 

[_T_]

You can look at @dokko ‘s threads here in the scanning forum and draw your own conclusions, but a lot of what your asking depends on the type of film, how it’s developed and what has been recorded onto it.

 

[bags27]

I scanned a lot with my then-Fuji FGX 50r and a Mamiya 120 macro 1:1. I sent a couple of those negatives out for drum scanning. No comparison. I've resolved to do the best I can without getting too peepy about results. When I have a negative that I want to print large, I'll send it out for drum scanning.

Photoshop's AI is so crazy good now that some of the shortcomings in home scanning can be fixed there.

 

[bags27]

There are rumors of a 100c - there is a thread on hasselbladdigitalforum.com.

Be careful though, for having had the 907x for 3 years, I find it absolutely brilliant when using as a digital back with a 500-series body. However, I never could warm up with the user interface (or lack thereof!) when used as a 907x with an XCD lens. So many control buttons are missing. I suggest to try it before you buy, if that's your intended purpose. Some love it (I don't - so much that I decided to swap it for an X2D).

Thanks for this. It would indeed serve largely as a back for my HB 500 c/m. I have a friend with the X2D. As briliant as it is, I just can't convince myself to going back to looking through an EVF. Just my own weirdness.

 

[dokko]

The next question is, which resolution is necessary to extract "everything" (so to speak) out of 35mm film... is 60 Mpixels overkill? (I have no answer to this question)

"everything" is a high goal to aim

I found the sweet spot for very large prints is around 10'000-12'000ppi, which would be about 170-200MP for 35mm film, or 800-1000MP for 6x7.

in some cases going up to 20'000ppi can bring a benefit, but in most cases it will just result in sharper grain structure (that would be around 700MP for a 35mm negative).

at 40'000 the grain starts to look different than what we're used to, so I've only done that for experimental projects.

now the main problem is that getting more than 5000ppi of a film is hard and more than 10'000ppi is incredibly hard, because of things like optical system, film flatness, optical alignment, vibrations etc need to be optimized to a very high degree.

the other major problem is that getting good colors from a color negative is just as hard as getting very high resolution.

 

[bags27]

"everything" is a high goal to aim

I found the sweet spot for very large prints is around 10'000-12'000ppi, which would be about 170-200MP for 35mm film, or 800-1000MP for 6x7.

in some cases going up to 20'000ppi can bring a benefit, but in most cases it will just result in sharper grain structure (that would be around 700MP for a 35mm negative).

at 40'000 the grain starts to look different than what we're used to, so I've only done that for experimental projects.

now the main problem is that getting more than 5000ppi of a film is hard and more than 10'000ppi is incredibly hard, because of things like optical system, film flatness, optical alignment, vibrations etc need to be optimized to a very high degree.

the other major problem is that getting good colors from a color negative is just as hard as getting very high resolution.

I have shoot with my Mamiya 7 and the 65mm lens, which is, I think, the sharpest. Professional drum scanning produced files of >600 mp for my wall prints that I'm happy with.

 

[George Mann]

What focal length is optimal for scanning 6x6 with my Nikon D2x (1.5x aps-c)?

 

[dokko]

I have shoot with my Mamiya 7 and the 65mm lens, which is, I think, the sharpest.

yes, all the Mamiya 7 (and Mamiya 6) lenses are very good, but the 65mm (along with the 43mm) is probably the sharpest medium format lens ever (specially off center).

 

[dokko]

What focal length is optimal for scanning 6x6 with my Nikon D2x (1.5x aps-c)?

the focal length defines the working distance, so for a compact setup something like 50-60mm and if you prefer a bit more space between the lens and the film something around 100mm.

your sensor height is around 16mm and the medium format negatives image height around 57mm, so you'll need about 0.28x magnification.
since the camera only has 12MP, pretty much any macro will do, as you can stop down quite a bit (probably around F8) without running into diffraction limitations.

 

[etn]

the focal length defines the working distance, so for a compact setup something like 50-60mm and if you prefer a bit more space between the lens and the film something around 100mm.

your sensor height is around 16mm and the medium format negatives image height around 57mm, so you'll need about 0.28x magnification.
since the camera only has 12MP, pretty much any macro will do, as you can stop down quite a bit (probably around F8) without running into diffraction limitations.

The Nikon 60mm macro lens works well for scanning, and can be found relatively cheaply second-hand. (I use an old AF-D version, no complaints. The newer ones a perhaps a bit better?) Stop it 2-3 stops down from max aperture and you're all set.

 

[George Mann]

I will get a 60mm for my medium format scanning. But do I still need a 40 for 35mm?

 

[MattKing]

The choice of focal length is impacted by the equipment used in other ways. If, for example, you are trying to use a traditional slide copying bellows setup, you are likely to be constrained with respect to the lens to film distance
I have two sets of really high quality Olympus slide copying units that can only be used with a full frame digital camera if I want to use my 50mm macro lens. If I wanted to use a Micro 4/3 camera, I'd need a 25mm macro lens to make that setup work.

 

[etn]

Thanks for this. It would indeed serve largely as a back for my HB 500 c/m. I have a friend with the X2D. As briliant as it is, I just can't convince myself to going back to looking through an EVF. Just my own weirdness.

My biggest gripe with the 907x, when used as a "standalone" camera with XCD lens, is the lack of controls for aperture, shutter speed, etc. The X2D obviously does not have this problem. Hasselblad sells a control grip for the 907x, for another $750.

On the flip side of the coin, the CFV back integrates very well with a 500-series camera. So well in fact, that the experience is virtually the same as when shooting film. Really a lot of fun. You just do not have to swap back after 12 exposures

 

[etn]

I will get a 60mm for my medium format scanning. But do I still need a 40 for 35mm?

The 60mm will be fine. You will be closer to the film than with medium format.

 

[George Mann]

I have a 35mm scanning rig that only works with a 40mm.