Guest Posted August 29, 2017 Share #41  Posted August 29, 2017 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) ...and here is another example, of an Agfa Scala slide. (All this is just to say that there a few good solutions for scanning now, although not on a mass-turnkey basis. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Edited August 29, 2017 by Guest Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/276051-nikon-d850-film-scanner/?do=findComment&comment=3347635'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 29, 2017 Posted August 29, 2017 Hi Guest, Take a look here Nikon D850 Film Scanner. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
vanGeist Posted August 30, 2017 Share #42 Â Posted August 30, 2017 Here is a thread on digitalizing slide film with the BEOON + M10 + Focotar 2 lens, with some examples, including the one below of a Kodachrome 25 slide, which I think is a good example of digitalizing a dense slide, although I haven't been posting family pictures. This looks very, very good. Can you post a 100% crop of his face? What is the resolution of those digitized negatives? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2017 Share #43  Posted August 30, 2017 vanGeist - Thanks. They're not negatives, they're slides (Kodachrome and Agfa Scala).  The resolution is that of the M10: 6000 x 4000. As I wrote in the linked thread, "my feeling is that using the M10 to digitalize transparency film results in files that require surprisingly little post-processing — less than I had to do when scanning with the Imacon Precision III scanner! Also, the BEOON copy stand makes digitalization easy, much faster than making high-resolution scans. That makes me toy with the idea of shooting some Ektachrome if it indeed it will really be sold again towards the end of this year. That is despite the fact that I really also like Portra 400 and 800."  More information, including why I am junking the Imacon, are in the linked thread. I'll leave it to others to provide 100% crops. _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted August 30, 2017 Share #44  Posted August 30, 2017 (edited)  vanGeist - Thanks. They're not negatives, they're slides (Kodachrome and Agfa Scala).  The resolution is that of the M10: 6000 x 4000. As I wrote in the linked thread, "my feeling is that using the M10 to digitalize transparency film results in files that require surprisingly little post-processing — less than I had to do when scanning with the Imacon Precision III scanner! Also, the BEOON copy stand makes digitalization easy, much faster than making high-resolution scans. That makes me toy with the idea of shooting some Ektachrome if it indeed it will really be sold again towards the end of this year. That is despite the fact that I really also like Portra 400 and 800."  More information, including why I am junking the Imacon, are in the linked thread. I'll leave it to others to provide 100% crops. We've heard a lot about your feelings about the old Imacon Precision, Mitch. And we know from plentiful posts here and over on RFF that you're enjoying the new M10. I think what people are interested in is meaningful comparisons like this from this discussion: https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/116506-imacon-flextight-1/?p=1274715 Edited August 30, 2017 by plasticman Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nowhereman Posted August 30, 2017 Share #45  Posted August 30, 2017 Mani - Hope you'll get the comparisons that you want. I only have the BEOON/M10 available, as my Imacon is in Bangkok, and I won't be there for a couple of months. But, then, I would have to fix the feed mechanism, which is producing out-of-focus scans on the trailing edge — so no comparison would be available anyway. You've linked a comparison by someone who uses two scanners, fast and and a slow one. I'm not in that situation. _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted August 30, 2017 Share #46  Posted August 30, 2017  Mani - Hope you'll get the comparisons that you want. I only have the BEOON/M10 available, as my Imacon is in Bangkok, and I won't be there for a couple of months. But, then, I would have to fix the feed mechanism, which is producing out-of-focus scans on the trailing edge — so no comparison would be available anyway. You've linked a comparison by someone who uses two scanners, fast and and a slow one. I'm not in that situation.  The DSLR scanning method is a tantalizing area. The current scanner market suggests to me that, when my Coolscan9000 no longer functions, I'd rather switch to this method than buy any of the (realistically priced) available alternatives.  At the same time, I haven't seen any really convincing examples of camera-captured scans yet - especially of negative films like Portra (which is my most used film). No-one seems willing or able to make impartial 100% comparisons that can show things like detail, color, edge-sharpness, and highlight transitions.  I've toyed with the idea of doing it myself - but then I thought it would be useful to get hold of some camera that has sensor-shift for even greater resolution and color fidelity (independent of the Bayer pattern - which a dedicated film-scanner isn't handicapped with), and so far I haven't been able to borrow one or get hold of a good macro lens to pair it with either.  In the meantime, there are a lot of threads like the one about the BEOON that strike me very much as artifacts of the endowment effect. The BEOON being a perfect example to me: the hysteria surrounding ownership of what's essentially just a copy stand suggests to me that many people wouldn't touch DSLR scanning with a long stick, were it not for the availability of a Leica-branded and hard to find model that makes it suddenly desirable. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nowhereman Posted August 30, 2017 Share #47  Posted August 30, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Maybe for some, but for me the BEOON is not a cult: it's a simple, sturdy and problem-free copying stand for 35mm digitalization. Other stand solutions I've seen get more involved. It also has the virtue of portability, so I can take it with me when I travel between continents. Nor is there the mechanical complexity of the feed mechanism of a scanner, which is what continually gave me problems with the Imacon, making me conclude that it's better for a lab that can have access to continuing service than for an individual. And, in the end, I was truly surprised when I found the quality I was getting with the M10 + Focotar 2. End of story.  People have been asking for 100% sections. I find that when I take a screenshot of an LR view of even a small section at 1:1, I get a 3MB file that I cannot post here. _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted August 30, 2017 Share #48  Posted August 30, 2017 My young (and old) friends and relations mostly use phones, not cameras!  Wrong group of friends . Just kidding - my group of fellow photographers is a big mix, but I have gone back to film in my photography about two years ago (I shot more film than digital this year so far). I know three other photographers who also went back to film more recently. Still a niche, but it is a slowly growing one. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted August 30, 2017 Share #49  Posted August 30, 2017  vanGeist - Thanks. They're not negatives, they're slides (Kodachrome and Agfa Scala).    And this works very well indeed. Issue with camera photographing of color negatives is to correct for the white balance of the negative to get to the original colors. I struggled a lot doing this in the past and I found it a huge waste of time dealing with this kind of PP. I am now using very successfully my Pulstek 8200i scanner with Silverfast 8 software which calibrates with its negafix module all kind of white balances of used color films that the colors appear correct on the screen without lots of PP needed. Advantage of the new Nikon D850 is that it also uses some internal white balance correction for photographed color negatives which might be an additional big benefit. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nowhereman Posted August 30, 2017 Share #50  Posted August 30, 2017 Martin - Yes, but I'm not sure your current workflow, and that of the F850 solution, is really less work and better quality than running files through MakeTiff and then ColorPerfect (with final adjustment in LR). I did the latter with some M9 digitalizations (with Focotar 2) with Portra 400 last year. Below are three examples in fairly difficult light. I'll be shooting some Portra 400 and 600 in October and shall look into the workflow further.  M3 | DR Summicron | Portra 400 Bangkok   M3 | Summilux-35 ASPH-FLE | Portra 400 Bangkok   M3 | Summilux-50 pre-ASPH | Portra 400 @ 1600 Chiang Mai  _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted August 31, 2017 Share #51  Posted August 31, 2017 (edited) "Negative/Positive Scanning: With the optional ES-2 Film Digitizing Adapter and compatible Micro-NIKKOR lens, the camera enables super high-resolution digitizing of 35mm slides or negatives and converts them in-camera to positives" Pete  For your information , just find this link and following the original subject of Pete : https://petapixel.com/2017/08/24/nikon-d850-doubles-45-7mp-film-scanner/ one more step of "digitalizing" film Edited August 31, 2017 by Doc Henry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted August 31, 2017 Author Share #52 Â Posted August 31, 2017 Yes, really this thread was to point out that Nikon are producing a camera body with internal C41 conversion. It seems to have gone off on a tangent. Pete 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nowhereman Posted September 1, 2017 Share #53  Posted September 1, 2017 Not really: we've been discussing the ways the Nikon 850 method might compare with other ways of doing camera digitalization. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ricoh Posted September 1, 2017 Share #54  Posted September 1, 2017 Martin - Yes, but I'm not sure your current workflow, and that of the F850 solution, is really less work and better quality than running files through MakeTiff and then ColorPerfect (with final adjustment in LR). I did the latter with some M9 digitalizations (with Focotar 2) with Portra 400 last year. Below are three examples in fairly difficult light. I'll be shooting some Portra 400 and 600 in October and shall look into the workflow further.  M3 | DR Summicron | Portra 400 Bangkok   M3 | Summilux-35 ASPH-FLE | Portra 400 Bangkok   M3 | Summilux-50 pre-ASPH | Portra 400 @ 1600 Chiang Mai  _________________ Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine Nice pics ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandokan Posted September 3, 2017 Share #55  Posted September 3, 2017 three things.  1. Slide and negative copiers have been around since before digital, so no reason you cannot put a digital camera at the end instead of a film camera. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Kaiser-Duplicator-Digital-Compact-Cameras/dp/B001JFHJPY/ref=pd_sbs_421_4?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=1ZWETDBAW4Z06WZM62PR  2. I would love an adaptor to digitize my MF 6x7 films.  3. The value add with the D850 is the built in software to do the conversion.  I am interested - but only if it's a camera I can use as well. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandokan Posted September 4, 2017 Share #56  Posted September 4, 2017 PS. What I would really love, is to produce slides from my digital files. Maybe the latest generations of computer screens with their 8K resolution could be direclty photographed by a camera loaded with slide film? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 11, 2017 Author Share #57 Â Posted October 11, 2017 It seems to be a pretty naff conversion, just a straight inversion of the curves, but I don't know what light source is that he's using - perhaps that's a factor, or not filling the frame with the negative. Â https://richardhaw.com/2017/10/09/update-nikon-d850-negative-digitizer-mode-pt2/ Â Pete Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted October 11, 2017 Share #58 Â Posted October 11, 2017 Painful viewing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotomas Posted October 11, 2017 Share #59  Posted October 11, 2017 PS. What I would really love, is to produce slides from my digital files. Maybe the latest generations of computer screens with their 8K resolution could be direclty photographed by a camera loaded with slide film? In the past this was common. There film-recorders was used for it. Hard to find these days. But if you have a possibility to use a 8K or even 16K recorder you will receive great slides, without any pixel-artifacts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.