Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Looking for macro lens to use for scanning 35mm negatives
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2023 2:19 am    Post subject: Looking for macro lens to use for scanning 35mm negatives Reply with quote
Hi!

Do you have any recommendation for a good macro lens to use to scan 35mm film - both movies reels and photos negatives. Do you have any suggestions? I am looking for something that has minimal distortion and very neutral color because I want the image to be as truthful as possible to the original negative/print.

I'm using a a7R II so I can adapt it. Could you give two recommandations, one if budget don't matter, and one less than 1000$USD.

Thanks!


PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2023 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Cheap 50mm enlargers will do the job for 1:1 copy, Schneider Componon, EL-Nikon and etc. Check https://coinimaging.com/Lens_tests.html .


PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2023 5:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If it was my negatives I would spend the extra hundred and fifty for either the rodenstck apo rodagon 50mm 2.8 or the schneider apo componon. They are true apochromatically corrected lenses and you will get more faithful color transitions. The el-nikkor are also said to be well corrected for color aberrations but I haven't seen head to head comparisons for your task. Note that the el nikkor is much much less expensive.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2023 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
Cheap 50mm enlargers will do the job for 1:1 copy, Schneider Componon, EL-Nikon and etc. Check https://coinimaging.com/Lens_tests.html .


And there The Hall of Fame list for 1/2 and 1/1 magnifications. Using a Sigma DG 50mm 2.8 myself. Could use the 70mm as well but at 1/1 you get near 280mm in height.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2023 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Those 6 element 4 groups quality enlarger lenses should come up at auction somewhat regularly depending on where you live. But you will need a decent helicoid - if you focus wide open and stop down, you will have to be careful as the common M42 and larger size helicoids are rotating.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 24, 2023 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would recommend a classical "slide duplicator" setup:

1) Bellows
2) Macro lens (either the standard 50mm / 55mm macro lens for easy working or a specialized lens for 1:1 copying)
3) Slide copy

Example for Nikon shown here:
https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/michaeliu/cameras/shared/ff2macro/ff2bellow.htm

I have such equipment for Canon FD, Konica AR and Minolta MD. All those Bellows / Slide Duplicator set are very well made (they were pretty expensive when new). While I haven't used it for color negatives, I have used it for slides and b/w negatives.

You might also use a 100mm AF macro lens directly attached to the camera; they ususally go to 1:1.

When reproducing slides the "DRO" modes of most cameras are extremely useful to master the (relatively) high contrast of slides.
Color negatives should not be a problems when it comes to contrast.

S


PostPosted: Sun Dec 24, 2023 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
I would recommend a classical "slide duplicator" setup:

1) Bellows
2) Macro lens (either the standard 50mm / 55mm macro lens for easy working or a specialized lens for 1:1 copying)
3) Slide copy

Example for Nikon shown here:
https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/michaeliu/cameras/shared/ff2macro/ff2bellow.htm

I have such equipment for Canon FD, Konica AR and Minolta MD. All those Bellows / Slide Duplicator set are very well made (they were pretty expensive when new). While I haven't used it for color negatives, I have used it for slides and b/w negatives.

You might also use a 100mm AF macro lens directly attached to the camera; they ususally go to 1:1.

When reproducing slides the "DRO" modes of most cameras are extremely useful to master the (relatively) high contrast of slides.
Color negatives should not be a problems when it comes to contrast.

S


Some good info here. Some of the 50-55mm micro/macro lenses were actually made with such copy work in mind.

As for the nikkors, the 55mm up to and including the f3.5 p.c. version had copy use as part of their design purpose~ close to flat field.
There was also a vivitar normal macro f2.8 that was fairly flat field oriented as well, and actually went 1:1.

Depending on the age of your originals material, you may have to go to color correction in post. C-41 has a tendency to orange cast as it ages, and E-6 gets a bit on the green side with age. Carefully stored Kodachrome seems to retain color the best over long storage peiods that I have seen.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 24, 2023 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Doc Sharptail wrote:
stevemark wrote:
I would recommend a classical "slide duplicator" setup:

1) Bellows
2) Macro lens (either the standard 50mm / 55mm macro lens for easy working or a specialized lens for 1:1 copying)
3) Slide copy

Example for Nikon shown here:
https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/michaeliu/cameras/shared/ff2macro/ff2bellow.htm

I have such equipment for Canon FD, Konica AR and Minolta MD. All those Bellows / Slide Duplicator set are very well made (they were pretty expensive when new). While I haven't used it for color negatives, I have used it for slides and b/w negatives.

You might also use a 100mm AF macro lens directly attached to the camera; they ususally go to 1:1.

When reproducing slides the "DRO" modes of most cameras are extremely useful to master the (relatively) high contrast of slides.
Color negatives should not be a problems when it comes to contrast.

S


Some good info here. Some of the 50-55mm micro/macro lenses were actually made with such copy work in mind.

As for the nikkors, the 55mm up to and including the f3.5 p.c. version had copy use as part of their design purpose~ close to flat field.
There was also a vivitar normal macro f2.8 that was fairly flat field oriented as well, and actually went 1:1.

Depending on the age of your originals material, you may have to go to color correction in post. C-41 has a tendency to orange cast as it ages, and E-6 gets a bit on the green side with age. Carefully stored Kodachrome seems to retain color the best over long storage peiods that I have seen.

-D.S.


The Vivitar 55/2.8 macro is actually surprisingly good.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 7:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here’s a comparison between a few short macro lenses I did earlier. As you can see the Vivitar did very good:
https://flic.kr/p/2o4AV6Z


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Here’s a comparison between a few short macro lenses I did earlier. As you can see the Vivitar did very good:
https://flic.kr/p/2o4AV6Z


Yes, the Vivitar is a significantly sharp lens. It color smears a bit more than the others, especially with the reds, but nothing major.

The Nikkor A/I-s 55 2.8 is a different computation than the earlier P and PC versions. Back when I had my ear to the ground, there were some rumblings of dis-satisfaction with the then new A/I 2.8 55 nikkor, mostly concerning distortion. Your test shots seem to bear witness with what actually happened. I think at that point, nikon was moving a bit away from the flat field copy idea, and trying to create an improved all around uses lens.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Komine family of Vivitar Macro/CF lenses (55/2.8, 90/2.8, 135/2.8 ) are all quite excellent optically and all have the same weaknesses, namely a large, unwieldy size, and helicals that tend to get gummed up/rough. Their front elements are also very deeply recessed, which in this particular use case could be a problem (discussed below).

If you can find a mechanically good example, they are highly recommended for general macro photography, but for slide and film duplication, I'd recommend something more petite in size and with a less recessed front element, especially if you are going to be doing movie reels with smaller film sizes and need to get particularly close up/beyond 1:1. The suggestions of a shorter focal-length enlarger lens on a bellows are good ones, as they'll let you get very close to the film frame at the high magnifications you need to fill the frame on your A7 without getting too unwieldy in size. If you are doing particularly small frames (8mm, etc.), even a smaller 50mm macro might be too recessed to achieve full frame coverage when mounted on a bellows.

Doc Sharptail wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Here’s a comparison between a few short macro lenses I did earlier. As you can see the Vivitar did very good:
https://flic.kr/p/2o4AV6Z


Yes, the Vivitar is a significantly sharp lens. It color smears a bit more than the others, especially with the reds, but nothing major.

The Nikkor A/I-s 55 2.8 is a different computation than the earlier P and PC versions. Back when I had my ear to the ground, there were some rumblings of dis-satisfaction with the then new A/I 2.8 55 nikkor, mostly concerning distortion. Your test shots seem to bear witness with what actually happened. I think at that point, nikon was moving a bit away from the flat field copy idea, and trying to create an improved all around uses lens.

-D.S.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Here’s a comparison between a few short macro lenses I did earlier. As you can see the Vivitar did very good:
https://flic.kr/p/2o4AV6Z


your test, helped me out to get the right one , thank you and Merry Christmas


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
BrianSVP wrote:

If you can find a mechanically good example, they are highly recommended for general macro photography, but for slide and film duplication, I'd recommend something more petite in size and with a less recessed front element, especially if you are going to be doing movie reels with smaller film sizes and need to get particularly close up/beyond 1:1.


If you are working at 1:1 or below (e. g. 2:1 for APS-C sized negatives on FF cameras) you should used the lens in its "retro" (=inversed) position: The rear lens will now look towards the subject (=film/slides to be copied), and the front element will face the sensor.

Since all the Komine (and Nikon) lenses mentioned above are made for SLRs, the distance between their rear (now "front") lens and the subject (=film/slide) will ALWAYS be greater than 35-38mm (about 1.5 inches) if the lens is used in its reversed position.

The same is true for all SLR (retrofocus) wideangles used in the retro (inversed) position (as it should be done if the scale is above 1:1). In other words, an inversed 2.8/35mm retrofocus lens has a BIGGER freen working distance than a dedicated 2.8/35mm lens for bellows!

S


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 5:40 pm    Post subject: Re: Looking for macro lens to use for scanning 35mm negative Reply with quote
vanylapep wrote:
Hi!

Do you have any recommendation for a good macro lens to use to scan 35mm film - both movies reels and photos negatives. Do you have any suggestions? I am looking for something that has minimal distortion and very neutral color because I want the image to be as truthful as possible to the original negative/print.

I'm using a a7R II so I can adapt it. Could you give two recommandations, one if budget don't matter, and one less than 1000$USD.

Thanks!


If budget doesn't matter:

Nikon Printing Nikkor 105 mm f/2.8
(https://www.closeuphotography.com/1x-macro-lens-test-2022)

Pretty much the best of the best for that kind of magnification. Only a couple of high-grade modern macro lenses come close. I don't think any matches it when it comes to correction. But it's better to read up on that stuff on Roberts site, as my knowledge may be incomplete...) Quite expensive though. (around your limit of 1000$ unless you're lucky and get a really good deal)

If budget does matter:

Minolta DiMage ScanElite 5400 lens
(https://www.closeuphotography.com/minolta-dimage-scan-elite-5400-lens/2018/2/8/minolta-dimage-scan-elite-5400-lens)
Not too expensive, but offers vary a lot.

Sample shots:


Bigger: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53420391901_a8f65f7fb1_4k.jpg


Bigger: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53419464057_35c4771036_4k.jpg

Best of both worlds, if you can find the right magnification version (there are 4 different ones):

Schneider Kreuznach Makro-Symmar 120 mm f/5.6
(https://www.closeuphotography.com/schneider-makro-symmar-sr-120)

This lens is excellent at a way bigger range than it is optimized for and has a really large image circle, while still featuring pretty much perfect correction at its best magnification.

Usually a bit pricier than the DiMage Scan Elite or similar scanner lenses, but more versatile.

Sample shots:

Found another one! by simple.joy, on Flickr

Hang‘in there… Christmas is coming! by simple.joy, on Flickr

In harmony by simple.joy, on Flickr

There are lots more options of course, but those are some of the best I know of.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
All true points. One thing to keep in mind, though is that the Vivitars also have rather large filter rings (62mm), so reversing them will be somewhat more of a chore than on smaller lenses. Also, depending on the mount they use, stopping down with the aperture ring may or may not work when reverse mounted. For inverted non-macro retro focus lenses, field curvature might be a concern, particularly if it's a lens that can't be stopped down when reverse matted.

stevemark wrote:
BrianSVP wrote:

If you can find a mechanically good example, they are highly recommended for general macro photography, but for slide and film duplication, I'd recommend something more petite in size and with a less recessed front element, especially if you are going to be doing movie reels with smaller film sizes and need to get particularly close up/beyond 1:1.


If you are working at 1:1 or below (e. g. 2:1 for APS-C sized negatives on FF cameras) you should used the lens in its "retro" (=inversed) position: The rear lens will now look towards the subject (=film/slides to be copied), and the front element will face the sensor.

Since all the Komine (and Nikon) lenses mentioned above are made for SLRs, the distance between their rear (now "front") lens and the subject (=film/slide) will ALWAYS be greater than 35-38mm (about 1.5 inches) if the lens is used in its reversed position.

The same is true for all SLR (retrofocus) wideangles used in the retro (inversed) position (as it should be done if the scale is above 1:1). In other words, an inversed 2.8/35mm retrofocus lens has a BIGGER freen working distance than a dedicated 2.8/35mm lens for bellows!

S


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 6:55 pm    Post subject: Re: Looking for macro lens to use for scanning 35mm negative Reply with quote
Wow, I'd not seen results.from the ScanElite lenses before. Very impressive. How do you go about mounting it?

simple.joy wrote:
vanylapep wrote:
Hi!

Do you have any recommendation for a good macro lens to use to scan 35mm film - both movies reels and photos negatives. Do you have any suggestions? I am looking for something that has minimal distortion and very neutral color because I want the image to be as truthful as possible to the original negative/print.

I'm using a a7R II so I can adapt it. Could you give two recommandations, one if budget don't matter, and one less than 1000$USD.

Thanks!


If budget doesn't matter:

Nikon Printing Nikkor 105 mm f/2.8
(https://www.closeuphotography.com/1x-macro-lens-test-2022)

Pretty much the best of the best for that kind of magnification. Only a couple of high-grade modern macro lenses come close. I don't think any matches it when it comes to correction. But it's better to read up on that stuff on Roberts site, as my knowledge may be incomplete...) Quite expensive though. (around your limit of 1000$ unless you're lucky and get a really good deal)

If budget does matter:

Minolta DiMage ScanElite 5400 lens
(https://www.closeuphotography.com/minolta-dimage-scan-elite-5400-lens/2018/2/8/minolta-dimage-scan-elite-5400-lens)
Not too expensive, but offers vary a lot.

Sample shots:


Bigger: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53420391901_a8f65f7fb1_4k.jpg


Bigger: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53419464057_35c4771036_4k.jpg

Best of both worlds, if you can find the right magnification version (there are 4 different ones):

Schneider Kreuznach Makro-Symmar 120 mm f/5.6
(https://www.closeuphotography.com/schneider-makro-symmar-sr-120)

This lens is excellent at a way bigger range than it is optimized for and has a really large image circle, while still featuring pretty much perfect correction at its best magnification.

Usually a bit pricier than the DiMage Scan Elite or similar scanner lenses, but more versatile.

Sample shots:

Found another one! by simple.joy, on Flickr

Hang‘in there… Christmas is coming! by simple.joy, on Flickr

In harmony by simple.joy, on Flickr

There are lots more options of course, but those are some of the best I know of.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 8:56 pm    Post subject: Re: Looking for macro lens to use for scanning 35mm negative Reply with quote
BrianSVP wrote:
Wow, I'd not seen results.from the ScanElite lenses before. Very impressive. How do you go about mounting it?



There are dedicated adapters from either RAF-camera or some other sellers... From time to time you can buy one with adapters (to either RMS, M39 or M42) already. As mentioned prices vary. They used to be quite cheap, but because a lot of macro shooters know about the quality of those lenses and the scanners they're in, are also still in high demand, they're usually not as cheap as some other scanner lenses. If you can find a broken scanner with an intact lens inside of it, that's probably your best bet of getting a cheap one, but due to the size it's usually only an option if you don't have to ship it round one half of the world.

Some lesser known microfilm lenses might also be excellent at those magnifications, but all of them are usually not that common unfortunately. I can recommend you one or two later though.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2023 10:18 pm    Post subject: Re: Looking for macro lens to use for scanning 35mm negative Reply with quote
simple.joy wrote:
Some lesser known microfilm lenses might also be excellent at those magnifications, but all of them are usually not that common unfortunately. I can recommend you one or two later though.


Sorry... I misremembered something about the ideal magnification ranges of some of these microfilm lenses... most of them are likely not very good at 1:1. There are some exceptions (at least from my own findings):

The Kodak Microfile Ektar 63 mm (f/8 - not specified):

And you just looked away... by simple.joy, on Flickr

Going for that fresh low-keying fruit by simple.joy, on Flickr

The Mamiya Sekor-CU 65 mm f/5.6

Generations | Venerations by simple.joy, on Flickr

Lightring in a bottle by simple.joy, on Flickr

Platonic love for books by simple.joy, on Flickr

and as far as regular enlarging lenses go, one of my usual recommendations would be the

Schneider Kreuznach Apo-Componon 60 mm f/4 Makro Iris

Far from Triple-A but close enough... by simple.joy, on Flickr

Nut and bold by simple.joy, on Flickr

Colors staying in line by simple.joy, on Flickr

A truly great lens in almost all aspects. Not very fast, but more than enough for macro and exceptionally sharp + very well corrected across a vast range. Not always cheap, but with some luck you can find it for similar prices than what an Apo-Rodagon 50 mm f/2.8 costs, and I'm pretty sure it's better for what you're attempting.

An even (significantly) cheaper option: The Minolta CE Rokkor 50 mm f/2.8. Also on equal footing with an Apo-Rodagon etc. and considerably cheaper.

One heat wonder by simple.joy, on Flickr

Crude slide, good flight! by simple.joy, on Flickr

Floral scream! by simple.joy, on Flickr


PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2023 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
BrianSVP wrote:

If you can find a mechanically good example, they are highly recommended for general macro photography, but for slide and film duplication, I'd recommend something more petite in size and with a less recessed front element, especially if you are going to be doing movie reels with smaller film sizes and need to get particularly close up/beyond 1:1.


If you are working at 1:1 or below (e. g. 2:1 for APS-C sized negatives on FF cameras) you should used the lens in its "retro" (=inversed) position: The rear lens will now look towards the subject (=film/slides to be copied), and the front element will face the sensor.

Since all the Komine (and Nikon) lenses mentioned above are made for SLRs, the distance between their rear (now "front") lens and the subject (=film/slide) will ALWAYS be greater than 35-38mm (about 1.5 inches) if the lens is used in its reversed position.

The same is true for all SLR (retrofocus) wideangles used in the retro (inversed) position (as it should be done if the scale is above 1:1). In other words, an inversed 2.8/35mm retrofocus lens has a BIGGER freen working distance than a dedicated 2.8/35mm lens for bellows!

S


This is good advice.

I have no idea how familiar the OP is with a 1:1 copy setup, so something I would add is that 1:1 magnification, focusing can no longer be done by just moving the lens (at least not in a traditional setup).

At 1:1 magnification the changes in subject, lens, and camera positions that affect focus will also affect magnification, so it will require a bit of trial and error to get the setup adjusted such that both focus and magnification are spot-on. The saving grace is that the subject isn't in motion, so you have all the time in the world to get the setup just right... Wink

This is where Stephan's earlier suggested bellows slide copy units come in very useful, as they make it easy to independently and accurately adjust subject, lens, and camera positions.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2023 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have been using a Canon EF 100mm Macro USM lens for many years with good results.


Minolta X-700, MD Rokkor 35mm 2.8, Fujicolor 160 NPC expired.





100%


PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2023 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Enlarging lenses are made for flat field reproduction. E Rokkors are cheap and really good.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2023 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Doc Sharptail wrote:


Depending on the age of your originals material, you may have to go to color correction in post. C-41 has a tendency to orange cast as it ages, and E-6 gets a bit on the green side with age. Carefully stored Kodachrome seems to retain color the best over long storage peiods that I have seen.

-D.S.


Kodachrome was good for storage, for projection not though if color shifts over time had to be avoided. Ektachrome the opposite. All relative of course.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2023 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:


I have no idea how familiar the OP is with a 1:1 copy setup, so something I would add is that 1:1 magnification, focusing can no longer be done by just moving the lens (at least not in a traditional setup).

At 1:1 magnification the changes in subject, lens, and camera positions that affect focus will also affect magnification, so it will require a bit of trial and error to get the setup adjusted such that both focus and magnification are spot-on. The saving grace is that the subject isn't in motion, so you have all the time in the world to get the setup just right... Wink

This is where Stephan's earlier suggested bellows slide copy units come in very useful, as they make it easy to independently and accurately adjust subject, lens, and camera positions.


Right, the reason why I mentioned lenses scoring well at 0.5 and 1.0 magnification. In between there is some (auto) focusing still possible. As you wrote the magnification will then somewhat vary though.
Ideal would be the camera + lens at fixed 1.0 magnification on a motorised slider and a focusing signal from the camera to the stepping motor. Even Magic Lantern does not provide that I think. Maybe picking up the camera's manual focus confirmation sound signal could work in a way.
EDit: which made me wonder whether an internal auto focusing lens, which usually also relies on some zoom function, could keep a true 1:1 magnification at 1:1 focusing.

Last edited by Ernst Dinkla on Wed Dec 27, 2023 11:51 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2023 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64403586

My solution instead of an analogue slide copier unit like the Illumitran.


PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2023 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
RokkorDoctor wrote:

I have no idea how familiar the OP is with a 1:1 copy setup, so something I would add is that 1:1 magnification, focusing can no longer be done by just moving the lens (at least not in a traditional setup).

At 1:1 magnification the changes in subject, lens, and camera positions that affect focus will also affect magnification, so it will require a bit of trial and error to get the setup adjusted such that both focus and magnification are spot-on. The saving grace is that the subject isn't in motion, so you have all the time in the world to get the setup just right... Wink


I am unfamiliar with 1:1 lens and 1:1 copy setup. I'm new to all this.

Do 1:1 lens have focus helicoid or are they fixed focus so you have to move the camera and lens?

I am currently using the Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AIS with a macro adapter attached in the front. I would like to upgrade to a real macro lens. The Nikkor Printing seems nice but very expensive, how far away is the Vivitar 55mm f2.5 macro from it in terms of result? It is at 10% of the price lol.

FYI, I am planning to have a setup like one of these two types. The camera, lens and subject (the film) will be in fixed positons.




The size of an image inside a 35mm film:
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2