1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Copying slides with adapted Canon bellows?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by thinkcooper, Jan 21, 2012.

  1. thinkcooper

    thinkcooper Mu-43 Veteran

    227
    Oct 29, 2011
    I have hundreds of 35mm slides with images of my family that were taken by my dad in the late 50s through mid 60's. My mom has tasked me with converting these into digital images. These will likely never see prints larger than 8x10".

    I've researched flatbed slide scanners and although they would produce the best quality, these seem way too slow for my patience.

    I'd way prefer to set up an adapted system on my EP3 like the Canon Bellows with 50mm macro and slide mount shown in this image. I'd illuminate with a diffused, remote triggered FL-36R.

    I have a slew of adapted Canon FD lenses, and really enjoy bringing these old beauties back into service, so setting up an adapted bellows system for slide duplication gets me all GAS'd up.

    Question I have - would a system like this allow me to use the bellows to dial in the slide crop and capture it's full image?

    Thanks in advance,

    Coop
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Sammyboy

    Sammyboy m43 Pro

    Oct 26, 2010
    Steeler Country
    The equipment you show will work, just remember if the slides are mounted in cardboard mounts, you may end up with the round corners and possibly the tiny fibers of the cardboard extending into the picture.
     
  3. thinkcooper

    thinkcooper Mu-43 Veteran

    227
    Oct 29, 2011
    Haven't seen the slides yet, but being from the 50's-60's I'd speculate they are all in cardboard. Thanks for the word.
     
  4. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    I have the Canon Canoscan 9000f, and it is as fast as you'd like it to be. Its direct competitor, the Epson V500, is also great. They are LED lit, so no warmup time, and they also have Digital FARE/ICE to remove dust, reducing your postprocessing time (although I clean my negatives anyway). They also do a whole batch of photos at once. I scan a batch in with no edits, and then do my batch sharpening, etc. in Lightroom. Goes as fast as I'd want it to, and the prices are $120-$150. If you want to go even faster, the Epson V700 is huge.

    That being said, yes your bellows will work fine. We get greater magnification with adapted lenses, so that a 1:1 lens on 35mm film gives us a 2:1 image.
     
  5. thinkcooper

    thinkcooper Mu-43 Veteran

    227
    Oct 29, 2011
    Shnitz - thanks for the feedback. How fast is "as fast as I'd like it be" :smile:

    Researching the Canon 9000f, it certainly seems like the right scanner for the money. If I were to buy one, it'd be my fifth or sixth color scanner over the last twenty years. Been using scanners for art for a while. What worries me is that for a decent dupe of each slide, I'd be looking at between 5-10 minutes of scan time per bank of four slides. With all the slides I need to capture, It'll take cumulatively a lot of time.

    Either way, I'd need to clean each slide, then place it into a holder. It feels like the bellows dupe process would be a really quick way to simply set-up the rig, then clean and mount, then capture each slide.

    That said, I'd love to hear what your time per slide works out to be, at a reasonable resolution.

    TIA

    Coop
     
  6. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    You may have some difficulty with a copier set-up. They were all designed with 1:1 reproduction in mind. You're going to need a little less than 1:2. The set-up you're showing may have too much extension. You can use a longer lens so the extension will give less magnification, but then you need to move the slide further away. The slide bellows may not extend far enough.

    I tried a similar set-up and with a 50mm lens the magnification was too high. With a 90mm I think I got 1:2 and I definitely did with a 135mm, but with both of those there wasn't enough extension on the slide side.

    Another consideration is you want a good flat field macro lens for a good reproduction. A standard lens may get you the magnification you need but image quality, even on a good lens won't give very good results in this application.

    If you have to buy the set-up, it may not be the best option. If you can try it out, well maybe it's worth it. A scanner is a lot easier!

    Fred
     
  7. ddegomez

    ddegomez Mu-43 Regular

    40
    Apr 7, 2011
    20 Megapixal slide dupes

    I work in an archive, photographing large 2D art. Anything that will fit in the flatbed scanner the boss will take care of. I asked the boss to scan some 70mm negs, just as test. Took the scanner 30 min. to scan a 12 inch neg. with so-so image quality.
    With my own 35mm slides I use a reversed 50mm lens with a bellows. I shoot the slides with the camera in 'portrait' orientation. To cover the entire slide requires three overlapping frames. The three frames are stiched together with a panorama program in a computer, making a final, 20+ megapixel image (using a 12 megapixel camera). Shoot all three frames at the same exposure and don't forget to set the color temp of your light source.
    I made a slide stage that allows easy access to the slide for moving the slide for the three exposures. I also made a stage for 70mm film. 30 years ago I built a 360 degree panorama camera that used 70mm film (it made a negative 18 inches long!). Lacking resources at the time I could only make contact prints. Today, with digital files made from the negatives I can make prints 8 x 52 inches.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    Well, it highly depends on whether you have FARE turned on or not, as that makes the scan time much longer. My desktop is currently functioning as my media center, so it's connected to a TV and not at my desk, otherwise I'd run a quick test for you. Give me a few days, maybe Monday or Tuesday I'll make it work. Overall though, with FARE enabled, it takes a couple minutes per batch. With slides, it does 4 at a time. While the scanner is working, I am cleaning the next batch of slides using: PEC-12 (or the comparable rival product, it is mostly methanol by most accounts), PEC pads, and lighter fluid (NAPTHA, it's the archivist's secret weapon!), plus compressed air and an anti-static brush. If I finish early, the I edit the previous batches of photos in Lightroom while I wait. I have little to no downtime sitting and watching the scanner, if that's worth anything.

    I don't scan at full resolution. 9600 dpi doesn't seem to produce any better images than 4800 dpi, so I don't bother with the increased file size. Anyway, I doubt that the flatbed scanners really have the optics necessary to do 9600 dpi, it's probably interpolation. I save the files as TIFF (lossless, uncompressed), having the scanner software do NO color correction, sharpening, etc. Once the photos are on my computer, I use Lightroom to adjust white balance, edit the photos for color and exposure, sharpening, etc. If there is a "failed" negative on the roll, I use the scanner software to adjust exposure by under/overexposing as necessary during scan.


    I tried doing some google searching to see if I could get around hauling my tower back to my desk, and didn't find anything relating to speed. However, I found some links that you might find enlightening or useful:

    On film scanning/digitizing, my last words… « MapGeek.Org
    Scanning - Canoscan 9000f? - Leica User Forum
    Scanning film
    New Canon CanoScan 9000F & SilverFast; An Ideal Flat-Bed Scanner & Software For Photo Enthusiasts | Shutterbug
    Canon CanoScan 9000F flatbed scanner with film scanning, The review.
    Scanner Review: CanoScan 9000F
    Bellows
    Camera Scanning | dpBestflow

    ddegomez, you can't just place film onto a scanner and expect it to work. First off, negatives and slides are transparencies, so they have to be back-lit, which film scanners like mine do. If you just use a regular scanner with the light under the glass instead of in the lid, then you're going to get dismal results. Also, film-capable flatbed scanners have negative carriers, because negatives don't produce optimal sharpness straight on the glass.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. thinkcooper

    thinkcooper Mu-43 Veteran

    227
    Oct 29, 2011
    You guys are awesome!

    shnitz - thank you for the details - a lot of stuff to consider. I was trying my best Google-fu and missed some of these linked resources. Very much appreciated. I come from a pre-digital graphic design background and remember the days of drum scanned large format sheet film. We used to produce info graphic slides and illustrations for military and industrial clients, the process required us to create type and line art and then shoot 35mm slides of the art and supply those to the client. So the idea of a bellows system for duping slides kinda brings me back in time a bit. Maybe the romance isn't what its cut out to be.

    Fred - that set-up pictured is from an ebay listing for the whole package. I wish I could try it out before pulling the trigger. Pretty anxious about dropping some coin on that purchase and then ending up with a system that crops the slides too tight. I was worried about being able to get the slides out far enough from the 50mm to do an effective tight crop.
     
  10. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    Last summer I had a similar project - in my case about 5000 slides, a mixture of half frame and full frame.

    The solution I used was to use a slide projector to project the images onto a piece of ground glass and shoot off of that with a macro lens.

    The advantage of this was speed - I could drop a slide in and shoot.

    Maybe the quality wasn't as good as dedicated scanning, but it did allow me to capture the images good enough for a digital slideshow and to decide what ones were actually any good and worth further work.

    Using something like Aperture or Lightroom is worth doing for cataloging, cropping rotating etc.

    Also remember to set the camera to shoot 3:2 ratio

    cheers

    K
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. punkman

    punkman Mu-43 Regular

    151
    Dec 30, 2011
    Europe
    I recently did a bit of research on digitizing a big slide collection.

    I've collected a bunch of links: Film Scanners [Punk Manufacturing]

    Camera rigs don't seem to be worth it. Accessories for regular flatbed scanners are also not a good idea.

    Flatbeds designed for scanning film can be good. Dedicated film scanners can also be good.

    I found the reviews here interesting, they test effective resolution with a chart:

    Detailed test reports and experience reports about film scanners slide scanners: market overview, application in practice

    You will notice that most scanners struggle to reach 3600dpi resolution, never mind the 7200-9600dpi marketing numbers they slap on them.

    There is a big difference between the Epson V700/750 and the V500/600 models. The V700 can do 12 slides at a time, which is pretty great. It can't autofocus though, so you might have to mess around with height adjustments. The V750 has special glass coating to prevent Newton rings/reflections/etc, but the V700 doesn't have it.

    Plustek 7500i and 7600i make pretty good scans but they are slooooooooow. It will take about 15 minutes per slide using multi-exposure and ICE. Unacceptably slow if you have thousands of slides and there is not automated feeder for them.

    Reflecta makes some good scanners too. One of their models can automatically scan whole film strips. Automation for slides only exists in their DigitDia models, which can accept most types of slide magazines. These cost more than 1000 euros though, so you might as well look for a second-hand Nikon scanner with a slide feeder.

    I've decided to wait for my digitization project, until:

    - I find a fast cheap scanner (less than 500 euro, new or used)
    - I give up and buy a 1000+ euro scanner
    - I find someone else to do it with a slow scanner
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. lenshoarder

    lenshoarder Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 7, 2010
    Why not get a dedicated slide/negative scanner? Not one of those cheap ones they sell now, I've tried those and the quality is horrible. I would get an old Minolta or Nikon from 10 years ago. They sold for hundreds when new but are about $25 used now. Fill up the carrier with 4 or 5 slides pop it in and let it go. Just fill it whenever you walk by and you'll be done in no time at all. I still use my old Dimage that's 11 years old now. I bought a newer model on CL for a very cheap price as a backup.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. punkman

    punkman Mu-43 Regular

    151
    Dec 30, 2011
    Europe
    lenshoarder, I've been looking on eBay for old Minolta or Nikon scanners but haven't found anything good yet.

    Even older scanners seem to hold their value well. It's hard to find a cheap one that does one or more of the following:

    - can reach 3000+ dpi
    - has good dynamic range
    - 36 or 48-bit
    - has good speed or an automated feeder (most important factor for me, since I have many thousands of slides)

    Another problem is that some of these are very heavy compared to newer scanners. The shipping costs can easily add up to the cost of a mid-range Reflecta scanner.
     
  14. thinkcooper

    thinkcooper Mu-43 Veteran

    227
    Oct 29, 2011
    I wish I weren't so smitten with the idea of trying use my camera and the bellows set-up shown in the first post.

    I have this madman's sketch on my office white board with the following schematic to visualize how I could get this to work.

    [E-P3][m43rd Reverse adapter][Oly m43rd 45mm, reversed][custom made m43rd/C FD adapter from two rear lens caps][Canon FD/FL Bellows][Canon FD reverse adapter][Canon FL slide holder]

    Crazy eh?
     
  15. punkman

    punkman Mu-43 Regular

    151
    Dec 30, 2011
    Europe
    thinkcooper, a bit crazy, yes. I understand the attraction of tinkering though.

    If you care about speed and quality, that's probably not the way to go.

    If you want to add some more crazy to the mix, get a few IR LEDs and see if you can do DIY dust & scratch removal with Vuescan or Silverfast.
     
  16. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    A reversed 45 might give too much magnification. Remember you only need 1:2.

    This might be a good excuse to get the PL45 macro. Then cobble up a slide holder and fire a flash behind the slide.

    Fred

    PS A good scanner will still probably give you better results.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. thinkcooper

    thinkcooper Mu-43 Veteran

    227
    Oct 29, 2011
    I like the way you're thinking.

    How does this set-up sound? The kit in the photo includes the legacy Canon FD 50mm macro.

    [E-P3][m43rd Canon FD adapter][Canon FD 50mm macro][Canon FD reverse adapter][Canon FD/FL Bellows][Canon FD reverse adapter][Canon FL slide holder]

    I'd jump for the PL45 macro in a heartbeat, but my wife would have my head. In the last thirty days an Oly 45mm and PL 20mm/1.7, along with an Oly FL-50R showed up at the door from brown santa. I can rationalize the bellows set-up in the first post to her cause it preserves family history. But the PL45 macro and a bellows set-up would push me over the top...

    The scanner would be an easy one to justify as well, but it just feels so boring in comparison to acquiring an adaptable bellows and an adaptable macro that I can use for some uber close-ups. :rolleyes:
     
  18. lenshoarder

    lenshoarder Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 7, 2010
    Here's a Minolta Dimage III that sold for $50.

    Konica Minolta Dimage Scan Dual III Desktop Film/Slide Scanner | eBay

    I have this scanner. I got it for $25 on CL. It meets all your requirements except for the 3000 dpi, it's only 2820 dpi but that should be close enough. I also picked up an Dimage IV that does 3000 dpi on CL for $9. It was so cheap because it didn't come with the power supply.

    Here's a review from it back in the day.

    Steves Digicams - Minolta DiMAGE ScanDual III - User Review

    Here's the original scan dual for $19. A little short on your specs. I have this one too. It was my first. The big drawback is that it's not automatic so you have to manually advance each frame. Still for $19, the results should be more than acceptable.

    Minolta Dimage Scan Dual F-2400 135 SCSI Film Scanner | eBay
     
  19. punkman

    punkman Mu-43 Regular

    151
    Dec 30, 2011
    Europe
    You are making me jealous...

    Here is the cheapest in european eBays: Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II film scanner | eBay

    19 bids already, will easily go above 100 GBP. And I can't bid on it anyway.

    You should smuggle some of those cheap scanners into Europe. :p
     
  20. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    Those Minolta or Nikon scanners from 10 years ago are still selling for a ton today, because of the enthusiast's effect. A lot of fundamentalists are claiming they are a ton better (who knows, maybe they are, but I haven't seen any difference), so they're still selling for ridiculous prices. Go see for yourself; do an ebay search for "Nikon Coolscan." There's a 5000 that is currently up to $3,000 with 20-something bids. Plus, they aren't as fast as a flatbed film scanner, and they don't have the newest iteration of FARE/ICE.
    EPSON V700 review
    Maybe some people have off-focus flatbed scanners for some reason. I don't see a reason to pay more than a V500/V600/Canoscan 9000f, based on the results I've seen. You can't get a comparable-quality dedicated film scanner for anywhere near the same price. If I had plans to scan large format or wanted more slides per scan, however, I see the reasoning in stepping up to the V700/V750.