Digitizing slides - any reason to choose an MILC over a DSLR?
Jan 30, 2023 14:27:10 #
Dik wrote:
Electronic shutter, no vibrations with mirroless.
With lens mounted slide holders SLR vibration can do no harm.
Jan 30, 2023 14:31:18 #
User ID wrote:
With lens mounted slide holders SLR vibration can do no harm.
(As some are going: "But, but, but, there's vibration... Must never be vibration. Under any circumstances".
)Jan 30, 2023 14:31:27 #
Longshadow wrote:
If a slide adapter is mounted to a lens, how would any camera vibration make a difference?
None at all. Slide duping discussions are notorious for bringing out fake experts that just parrot "expertise" thaz not really applicable to the situation.
Jan 30, 2023 14:32:48 #
User ID wrote:
None at all. Slide duping discussions are notorious for bringing out fake experts.
Quite evidently...
A good experiment with a mounted slide adapter would be to set the exposure for a 30th of a second and wiggle the camera a little while snapping the shutter....
I'd be more concerned with the overall image quality between the two cameras. Use the better of the two.
Jan 30, 2023 15:04:31 #
Longshadow wrote:
Quite evidently...
A good experiment with a mounted slide adapter would be to set the exposure for a 30th of a second and wiggle the camera a little while snapping the shutter....
I'd be more concerned with the overall image quality between the two cameras. Use the better of the two.
A good experiment with a mounted slide adapter would be to set the exposure for a 30th of a second and wiggle the camera a little while snapping the shutter....
I'd be more concerned with the overall image quality between the two cameras. Use the better of the two.
I have an old Canon 50MP SLR. Great duping machine, a sort of "retirement job" for an SLRosaurus. Get a used one, add any old cheap macro lens and an ES2, dupe your 10,000 slides and then sell the whole rig. An older Nikkor 60 macro goes cheap. A D850 works for those that still have one. You can mess with the "picture style" in most SLRs to approximate the old Ektachrome slide duping film and just go with sooc jpegs.
Jan 30, 2023 20:34:15 #
Orphoto
Loc: Oregon
Having used an old Nikon slide copying attachment with a bellows....you can make a 2 sec exposure while moving the whole thing around by hand. Just doesn't matter.
Don't obsess over dynamic range. Both of your bodies have more range than the slides you are copying. I suspect ergonomics will be the difference maker. Which body is easier to use and control for the task?
I would suggest using manual white balance. Take a few test images and see which ones come out cleanest.
Don't obsess over dynamic range. Both of your bodies have more range than the slides you are copying. I suspect ergonomics will be the difference maker. Which body is easier to use and control for the task?
I would suggest using manual white balance. Take a few test images and see which ones come out cleanest.
Jan 30, 2023 21:33:31 #
Orphoto wrote:
Having used an old Nikon slide copying attachment with a bellows....you can make a 2 sec exposure while moving the whole thing around by hand. Just doesn't matter.
...
...
...
...
Amazing how that works, eh?
Jan 31, 2023 03:28:10 #
Longshadow wrote:
Amazing how that works, eh?
Whenever I shoot a blank wall to check for sensor dust I always wave the camera around. Likewise to check corner shading.
Jan 31, 2023 06:23:07 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
DaveyDitzer wrote:
I am resuming my project to digitize slides using a macro lens and Nikon slide holder shooting into a 5600 K LED light source. I have two different bodies that I can use for this - Nikon Zfc and a D500. The sensor sizes and MP are the same. I've not used either of these two for this project. Is there any reason to choose one body over the other?
You will get much better results with a scanner. You really need to check them out, makes it quicker, much easier and better.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
Jan 31, 2023 07:23:03 #
Nikon D850 and D740 both have the capability to convert slides to JPEG Fine format in camera. I've converted all my old 1970s and 80s slides. Then, use modern software to enhance them. It does require a special slide adapter attachment and a Nikon macro lens but works well.
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and-explore/a/tips-and-techniques/digitizing-film-using-the-d850-and-es-2-negative-digitizer.html
Brings back lots of memories.
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and-explore/a/tips-and-techniques/digitizing-film-using-the-d850-and-es-2-negative-digitizer.html
Brings back lots of memories.
Jan 31, 2023 07:31:05 #
Thank you DaveyDitzer for reminding me that I have a 1960's Kodak Carouse in a closet waiting to be digitized. The referenced article "Film Scanning with your dSLR or MILC camera" is simple and practical.
Jan 31, 2023 08:21:10 #
DaveyDitzer wrote:
I am resuming my project to digitize slides using a macro lens and Nikon slide holder shooting into a 5600 K LED light source. I have two different bodies that I can use for this - Nikon Zfc and a D500. The sensor sizes and MP are the same. I've not used either of these two for this project. Is there any reason to choose one body over the other?
Critical focus magnification on the Z
Jan 31, 2023 08:28:23 #
Don't get hung up on sensor sizes if the tech is years apart.
If you have a 24MP old body...and you have a 24MP new body...they are probably equal in size only...that's pretty much all.
Shoot electronic shutter...
P.S. If you have an old body and a new body and they have the same sensor...find yourself another camera line.
If you have a 24MP old body...and you have a 24MP new body...they are probably equal in size only...that's pretty much all.
Shoot electronic shutter...
P.S. If you have an old body and a new body and they have the same sensor...find yourself another camera line.
Jan 31, 2023 10:23:29 #
billnikon wrote:
You will get much better results with a scanner. You really need to check them out, makes it quicker, much easier and better.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
Quicker ??!!?!?!
Unless youve got a very fast film scanner with a big stack loader then NOTHING is faster than a camera. Anyone who has used both would know that.
Jan 31, 2023 10:55:56 #
User ID wrote:
Quicker ??!!?!?!
Unless youve got a very fast film scanner with a big stack loader then NOTHING is faster than a camera. Anyone who has used both would know that.
Unless youve got a very fast film scanner with a big stack loader then NOTHING is faster than a camera. Anyone who has used both would know that.
I gave up on my Epson V600 for two reasons:
1) It was TOO SLOW. Yes, the driver allowed some really cool Digital ICE features, but that died when Apple went "64-bit only" with their OS. And yes, it allowed pretty extensive adjustments before saving TIFF files. But a 16-bit TIFF is much bigger than raw, and more restrictive.
2) It was NEVER SHARP on 35mm film. Flatbeds seldom are.
Kodak used to sell an automatic slide feeder attachment for their $50,000 HR500 Plus Bremson scanner. You mounted an 80-slide Carousel tray on it and pressed "start". It was slower than a digital camera. It required a DP2 software license ($20K per server core in 2004!). But it did have Digital ICE and the results were gorgeous. Even pro labs could not make money with it, however.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.