Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
35mm slide scanners?
- Thread starter MajorFubar
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A sale...making this one do in the meantime.
Who will have the sale first...Sony or Sigma with their excellent 105mm Art lens. It is really a tossup between the two. I already have the Sony 85 1.8 so basically macro only as doubling as a portrait lens isn't that critical, and I am not going to do the extension rings with the 85.
If you already have a Nikon converter (which I think is what I'm reading in your setup), then you could consider a used Nikon 105. That's what I use. Especially if you aren't planning to use it as a portrait or anything but MF.
Of course, unless it's film stuff, I only buy new, so I would immediately discard this recommendation. 😂
WRT Nikon lenses-I've owned a slightly ridiculous number of 55mm Micro lenses and more than a fair few 105mms.
I would say that as an overarching trend, as you approach lifesize and greater, the older a lens is often the better it performs.
I sold my 105mm f/2.8 VR as I found it inferior to the 105mm f/2.8D at roughly 1/2 life size on down. Among 55mm lenses, I don't even like the f/2.8 AI-s version, and instead prefer the older AI/non-AI f/3.5 version.
What I've found is that Nikon often made the plain, simple unit focusing lenses(like, again, my much-loved f/3.5 55mms) great performers with very flat fields and that would often start kicking in around 1/10 life size. As you go the other way, toward infinity, they are often at best equal to and maybe not as good as benchmark 50mm lenses like the 50mm f/2. Floating elements(I THINK the 55mm f/2.8 AI-s was the first Micro lens with one) give more consistent performance infinity to closest focus distance, but my experience and looking at them side-by-side with unit focusing analogues tells me the floating element version typically isn't as sharp super close. The floating element really throws it all to heck if you throw extension tubes and/or bellows into it or reverse it.
That's just my take on it. I make an exception for the 105mm f/2.8D because it's good enough to make me happy and 1:1 without a tube is too convenient, but as I said I still find the older lens better than the current/newest version.
And the reason why I'm going on about 1:1 reproduction and flatness of field is because full frame reproduction of 24x36mm slides/negatives is done at 1:1 on a 24x36mm sensor, and ideally your negatives will be flat enough that you need a perfectly flat field lens.
As a side note too, bunnspecial's pick for the sharpest Nikon Micro lens-the Micro-NIKKOR-P Auto with serial numbers falling between 211001 and 273153. And yes I am serious about the serial number range. This is the "compensating aperture" version of the lens, which can either be convenient or a pain depending on your perspective(as the lens is focused closer, the aperture opens up proportionally so exposure settings stay the same-a product of non-TTL metering) and sometimes is found with that feature locked out. Still, though, it's splitting hairs but the one I have is better than both of my later f/3.5 examples(one a non-AI with a scalloped focus ring, one AI with a rubber ring).
I would say that as an overarching trend, as you approach lifesize and greater, the older a lens is often the better it performs.
I sold my 105mm f/2.8 VR as I found it inferior to the 105mm f/2.8D at roughly 1/2 life size on down. Among 55mm lenses, I don't even like the f/2.8 AI-s version, and instead prefer the older AI/non-AI f/3.5 version.
What I've found is that Nikon often made the plain, simple unit focusing lenses(like, again, my much-loved f/3.5 55mms) great performers with very flat fields and that would often start kicking in around 1/10 life size. As you go the other way, toward infinity, they are often at best equal to and maybe not as good as benchmark 50mm lenses like the 50mm f/2. Floating elements(I THINK the 55mm f/2.8 AI-s was the first Micro lens with one) give more consistent performance infinity to closest focus distance, but my experience and looking at them side-by-side with unit focusing analogues tells me the floating element version typically isn't as sharp super close. The floating element really throws it all to heck if you throw extension tubes and/or bellows into it or reverse it.
That's just my take on it. I make an exception for the 105mm f/2.8D because it's good enough to make me happy and 1:1 without a tube is too convenient, but as I said I still find the older lens better than the current/newest version.
And the reason why I'm going on about 1:1 reproduction and flatness of field is because full frame reproduction of 24x36mm slides/negatives is done at 1:1 on a 24x36mm sensor, and ideally your negatives will be flat enough that you need a perfectly flat field lens.
As a side note too, bunnspecial's pick for the sharpest Nikon Micro lens-the Micro-NIKKOR-P Auto with serial numbers falling between 211001 and 273153. And yes I am serious about the serial number range. This is the "compensating aperture" version of the lens, which can either be convenient or a pain depending on your perspective(as the lens is focused closer, the aperture opens up proportionally so exposure settings stay the same-a product of non-TTL metering) and sometimes is found with that feature locked out. Still, though, it's splitting hairs but the one I have is better than both of my later f/3.5 examples(one a non-AI with a scalloped focus ring, one AI with a rubber ring).
I use an Epson V700 Photo scanner and VueScan Pro with great results, but there are several small scanners, some made by Kodak that allow for scanning one slide or film photo at a time at 20MG resolution. The same can be done with any DSLR camera as shown by other posters. My favorite lens for this is relatively cheap, a Canon EF-100 mm Macro, but any brand macro lens of 100mm will be fine. I dust the slide of film using a film/lens/film brush before scanning. The software can be set to remove dust and scratches, and then I remove the rest while editing the photo on my computer, save the original edited photo to TIFF format, etc.
And don't forget that the iPhone can be used to take photos of your slides, and just like for a camera one could build a home-made rig for both the phone and the slide projector. Here is one:
www.diyphotography.net
This one was taken over 35 years ago using a Nikon F3 35mm camera with a 50mm lens and Kodachrome slide film (maybe ASA 64). My youngest son as a child:
And don't forget that the iPhone can be used to take photos of your slides, and just like for a camera one could build a home-made rig for both the phone and the slide projector. Here is one:
How to build a DIY 35mm slides and negatives copying machine
How to build a DIY 35mm slides and negatives copying machine
www.diyphotography.net
This one was taken over 35 years ago using a Nikon F3 35mm camera with a 50mm lens and Kodachrome slide film (maybe ASA 64). My youngest son as a child:
Last edited:
Yes, if you have the patience and want to scan one slide at a time (after dusting it of course), there are some miniature scanners at Amazon that scan each slide at 20 MB resolution, but they aren't cheap . I use a V700 and Vuescan Pro, but just one or two slides at a time. Ten slides takes too much work to edit. I have also been thinking about building a rig so I can take photos of the slides using one of my cameras and a Canon 100mm Macro lens. For photos on paper I just place the photo on a small table, and the camera on a tripod with the center column extended horizontally over the photo, plus diffused natural light. I could use the V700 scanner, but the camera is much faster if taking a few photos.
THIS! I did my parents entire collection of slides with my Epson V550. In fact, the savings from the cost to do it commercially even paid for the upgrade from an older V300. The issue is with a scan that small required bumping the dpi up to at least 2400 to get a file large enough to enlarge and that is painfully slow - even if can do 4 at a time. Then you still need to use some photo processing software (photoshop, etc) to clean up the scan. That is why the lightbox with a macro, shooting in RAW is a go to now for slides since have to finish in Photoshop/lightroom anyway. Negatives still use the scanner but can handle 2 strips of 6 at a time.
Here's a dumb question. Unless mishandled, slides lay flat without any sort of carrier, right? Am thinking of getting a roll of slide film for a trip to NYC. I can just lay the slide down on the light box and shoot it like I would my negatives, right? I just don't have to reverse it then. But since I already have a scanning setup for negatives, I should be set? I've never shot slide, let alone scanned it.
ETA: oh...I just remembered my local lab doesn't process slide film. Will have to rethink this.
ETA: oh...I just remembered my local lab doesn't process slide film. Will have to rethink this.
if the processed slide is already mounted, it's pretty flat
you will need a different setup to hold it for your camera rig.
Slide film is magical. Just had some digitized 35mm slides - Agfachrome - printed for a photo exhibit.
As you have probably researched - the exposure latitude for slide film is nill - needs to be spot on. I believe I used spot meter.
Or, have them send back the uncut roll and have fun going at it.well if i do shoot slide i’ll have to send it out for processing so then if just have the lab scan.
That should work. Mounted slides aren't perfectly flat all the time, but they tend to be pretty close. Unmounted slide film, not so much. If you are going to sandwich unmounted slide film between your light table and a piece of glass to flatten it, make sure that it's anti-Newton glass.
Just remember with slide film, expose for the highlights. It's different from negative film, where you can expose for the shadows.
In case you are looking for a film holder, I have seen reviews on YouTube for the Essential Film Holderyes that’s what i do with negatives
Essential Film Holder
Essential Film Holder is THE best value film holder for DSLR scanning. Includes FREE courier shipping to over 93 countries. Supports widest range of film formats.
clifforth.co.uk
Molly,
First of all, DO IT with the slide film and you won't regret it.
As said, mounted slides are usually relatively flat. Just be aware that there are two common types of mounts-cardboard and plastic. Both have their ups and downs, and IMO properly mounted in paper probably gives better flatness than plastic as they cement the film from every direction. With that said, unmounting from a paper mount requires destroying it, where plastic can usually be CAREFULLY poppoed apart to get the film out. Paper is also messy and leaves dust on the film, and it cuts off more of the frame than plastic.
I always get 35mm mounted, although sometimes I question doing it. I've also debated about getting a mounting machine and then mounting myself after I do the initial scan of it.
First of all, DO IT with the slide film and you won't regret it.
As said, mounted slides are usually relatively flat. Just be aware that there are two common types of mounts-cardboard and plastic. Both have their ups and downs, and IMO properly mounted in paper probably gives better flatness than plastic as they cement the film from every direction. With that said, unmounting from a paper mount requires destroying it, where plastic can usually be CAREFULLY poppoed apart to get the film out. Paper is also messy and leaves dust on the film, and it cuts off more of the frame than plastic.
I always get 35mm mounted, although sometimes I question doing it. I've also debated about getting a mounting machine and then mounting myself after I do the initial scan of it.
but could i just get the roll uncut like negatives and use my existing film holder?
I got an uncut roll one time (I developed the slides as I recall), then getting the 2" frames and individually mounting was a pain. Never again...and thankfully it doesn't look like the sell the chemicals for home development of slides.
Since you already have the negative holder from Negative Supply, I see they also sell a slide attachment. For one time use it wouldn't be cost effective. I assume your setup is light source, negative carried then camera mounted shooting down. There is an easy workaround. While from my earlier photo will note that mine was upright with a 3 sided slot to hold the slide. It is even easier with a flat light source setup like yours as no holder is required, put a mask (black art paper sheet/poster board) with a hole cut just larger than the slide. While you will see it unused on the top of the box in the photo, draw the outline of the slide on the paper/poster board for consistent slide placement. That is a lot cheaper than the $79 slide carrier attachment and $29 mask that Negative Supply wants.
Oh, and good luck with the slide film. Have you seen the price of a roll. While all brands are out of stock at B&H, they are over $20 per roll, plus another $12 to develop. I will say that my well equipped local camera store, while typically matching B&H on manufacturer controlled pricing, is significantly cheaper than B&H on film - both color and B&W. I haven't checked slides. Developing 35mm color $4.99, B&W $5.99, with scans, prints, contact sheets extra. Have to confirm is color includes slides as didn't specify and slides were not listed in the exclusions. Frankly at those prices, I can't even develop them myself cheaper, and just becomes the convenience of "now" rather than a day or two from now.
Last edited:
I am put off by the price of slide film as my local lab doesn't process it, and the mail order lab I've used before charges $18/roll for processing (and not sure if that includes scans or not), plus there is a much longer wait time with mail order. So for now I'll probably just stick to negative film. My local lab charges $8/roll for dev and another $8 for scans; I don't mind the dev fee but there's no reason to pay scan fees now. I haven't broken even yet on the scans, but I will.
Curious me looked online and found a lab that does E6 processing (no scans included) for $11.99
E-6 Slide Film Processing
Send us your E6 slide film for processing, including 35mm, 120/220 and 4x5 film. We can develop most E6 films, including Provia, Velvia, Ektachome and AfgaChrome.
processonephoto.com