Using 20D as a scanner for Minox negatives

[henry_minsky1]

I found a pile of Minox negatives (8x11 mm) that I want to digitize. I

was looking at slide scanners like the Minolta Dual IV, which is about

$300. But then I was wondering if I could get decent quality

conversions using my Canon 20D somehow. Can anyone suggest the best

setup for imaging this size of negative? Maybe a macro lens imaging

the negatives on a light table? Or some kind of projection system ?

[phil vaughan - yorkshire u]

You'd need a macro lens with a flat field of view, like the 50mm 2.5 macro, then the life size converter, then a light table/camera stand set up. When you've done that you'll end up with a lower resolution file than can be had from a decent quality scanner.

 

My wife recently 'inherited' a load of slides, I bought a second hand Minolta Dual III (at the auction site) which I plan to sell once finished with the project, at the auction site.

 

The lens, converter etc will cost more than a good used scanner, so unless you're planning to start macro shooting, the scanner's a better bet IMO.

[alexandru_petrescu]

You may also use a tripod that can hold camera downwards, between the legs. Some Slik's do.

[PuppyDigs]

You could put them in slide mounts, mask and use a cheap slide copier. Although a

dedicated film scanner will be better, you'll still have to mount and mask the negs (or

make a custom holder).

[david_littleboy__tokyo__ja]

"lower resolution file than can be had from a decent quality scanner"

 

That's true for 24x36, but not 8x11: the Minolta is 5400 dpi, which is 212 dots/mm. That gives a 1700 x 2300 pixel image from the 8x11mm frame. If you set up a slightly under 2x macro with the 20D (15x23mm frame), then you could get 2200 x 3000 pixels.

 

Hmm. You'd need a macro lens with reasonably flat field at 2x. Since most macro lenses are optimized for 1x, this may be problematic. At 1x (easy with a slide copier attachment), that's 1100 x 1500 or so pixels. That may be plenty of resolution, depending on the quality of the originals.

[tommy huynh]

The hard part isn't taking the photo, it's inverting the image and compensating for the negative mask. Won't cost you anything but time to try but it's not easy. Remember you are applying 2 gamma curves doing it this way so don't expect great results.

[henry_minsky1]

Tommy, can you say more about the post processing needed? If I just use the "Invert" operation in Photoshop, and then some auto-level, will that produce good results, or is there some real magic needed?