Using a DSLR w/macro instead of a scanner to digitize film negs

DSlr has more distortion than scanner

If you use a good macro lens and are careful to get even lighting then the macro/digital combination can be surprisingly good. I still use my scanner because it is easy to use (settings saved) and gives consistent results. However, the biggest negative it takes is 120 and I have a ton of 4x5 negatives so I will use the macro set up for those.

I don't know what some previous posters were doing wrong, but DSLR copying of film is easy, sharp, super-quick and distortionless with the right equipment.

 

1) You need a camera of 24 megapixels or above for best results.

2) You need to use a proper macro lens (and no teleconverter!).

3) A camera-mounted speedlight reflected from a white surface is all that's needed as a light source - this eliminates any vibration blur too.

 

FWIW, I'm not sure why this 3 year old thread has been resurrected, when a number of newer threads on the same subject have more realistic and in-depth responses.

Edited November 3, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

I don't know what some previous posters were doing wrong, but DSLR copying of film is easy, sharp, super-quick and distortionless with the right equipment.

Agree, but have used my DF and an led to get excellent results as well