"Scanning" negatives with a Pentax DSLR

<p>I just finished my setup to digitize my collection of negative film and slide pictures. I used most Pentax equipment to do it:<br /> 1) Pentax *ist DL camera,<br />2) Pentax Auto Extension Tube K #2 and #1 (31 mm extension)<br />3) SMC Pentax M 50/1.7 lens<br />4) Asahi Pentax Slide Copier<br>

<br /> I used also an aluminium tube and a flash bracket to attach the slide copier.<br>

<br /> The process:<br /> 1) Take the pictures of 36 frame negative film (5 minutes),<br />2) Invert tand Auto levels with GIMP 2.6 with a Batch Script.<br /> The Invert and Auto Levels take less than 1 minute for all 36 frames. The whole process for a film with 36 frames is about 6 minutes.<br>

<br /> The setup:<br /> <img src="http://g3.img-dpreview.com/0350B4948715413FAAF05912A6409CFA.jpg" alt="" width="900" height="598" /><br /> Following there are some results.<br>

<br /> The first result is a scan from a 1993 negative film of a portrait of my wife.<br /> <img src="http://g3.img-dpreview.com/304781EA62EF43229295C055B574FDD8.jpg" alt="" width="581" height="900" /><br>

This one from a Kodak T-Max 100 negative from 1988:<br /> <img src="http://g3.img-dpreview.com/7C5227660B174C9CBEDF312AD654B9F2.jpg" alt="" width="900" height="591" /><br>

This one from a 1993 Kodak Gold 100 negative:<br /> <img src="http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/8439/imgp5975b.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="797" /></p>

<p>Comments and critics are welcome.</p>

<p>Pretty good results considering. I suspect that the Pentax copier might be a little better than the ubiquitous Spiratone units.<br>

If you've ever noticed, the Spiratone units are always available in "new" condition on eBay. That's because anybody who ever bought one, only used it once before putting it back in the box and in the closet. ;)</p>

<p>I ended up buying a late model Repronar (the one where you supply the camera et al.), and it does work reasonably well with my Canon XTi, bellows, and a copy lens; but, honestly, I still find the results (slow though they are in coming) from my dedicated Canon FS-4000 and Vuescan to be better.</p>

<p>Does anyone know whether 0.5x magnification is enough for 135 film => APS-C? Curious whether a M50/4 Macro would require an extension tube for a setup like this. Someone more mathmatically inclined than I am...?<br>

135 Film: 24 x 36mm = 864<br>

APS-C: 23.4 x 15.6 mm = 365.04<br>

864 * 0.5 = 432 (larger than 1:1 APS-C?)<br>

Or is this wrong...?</p>

<p>I think the comments on the spiratone or any other slide copier are OFF base<br>

the setup shown uses a Normal Focal length pentax lens.<br>

this lens toe 5-mm f/1.7 lens is an excellent l;ens for taking photos but a better chouce would be a simpler lens such as an enlarging lens. or some OLD 50mm f/2.8 lens.<br>

the desicated slide copiers eith those with a long tube or those that fastened to a bellows<br>

WITHOUT the use of a camera ( normal) lens<br>

your results are good. but with a simpler lens could be even better.<br>

a 50mm high speed lens likely has some curvature of field,.<br>

the only thing worse would be a 35mm or 28mm wa lens.<br>

I used up several hundred feet of e-4 e dupe film<br>

with the spiratone duplicator<br>

but I had someone who was willing to pay for the film and chemicals.</p>

<p>Jeff adler suggesed an unusual but workable method.<br>

Copy slides with a FILM camera on negative film and let the lab make<br>

a scanned CD.</p>

<p>If I had to do it I would either use the slide duplicator or a bellows<br>

and a flat field lens.<br>

as said yopur method seems top work fairly well.<br>

BUt i don't have a dslr. if I get one it WILL be adaptable to a T adapter/.</p>

<p>Nice work! I've used a setup like this, except I was copying slides. I used a Tamron 90mm macro lens. I was pleased with the results and it was much faster than scanning.</p>

<p>These are impressive results. I would still have to recommend a dedicated film scanner however. This allows you to remove dirt and scratches automatically. </p>