As long as a fixed magnification is fine, I prefer extension tubes to bellows. I particularly like the Nikon version, each of which had a threaded foot. I mount the extension tube on a an Arca compatible rail, sliding the rail to achieve focus. In my use it was more rigid and less kludgy than using a PB-4.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
ThanksOriginally Posted by Peter De Smidt
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
If you're doing 4x5 in one shot, a 50-80mm enlarging lens would be in its wheel-house.
Here's a PN-1 extension tube combined with and M2
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
I’m planning on stitching. I need a larger file that a single capture can give me. I put too much effort into a file to not be able to print large.If you're doing 4x5 in one shot, a 50-80mm enlarging lens would be in its wheel-house.
Here's a PN-1 extension tube combined with and M2
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
Even with pixel-shift?
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
That I can’t answer till I try it. Have you tried it? My bread and butter has become large prints.
Thanks,
Kirk
at age 73:
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep"
No, but I trust Sandy's results. I expect that doing what he does, i.e. doing a 3 frame stitch with pixel shift, would be the best way to go. That's about 1/3-1/4th magnification. I'm not sure what the best lens would be in that range.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Peter,
Just want to say that I appreciate your very early experimentation with this method of digitizing film. As I recall there was a lot of skepticism from PMT advocates back then, but thanks for hanging in there. And no disrespect to drum scanner owners, as I am one of them. But as good as they are, drum scanners are a product of 1990s technology, and with their hundreds of moving parts prone to failure. On the other hand digital sensor technology is constantly increasing in resolution and sensitivity, at lower cost and with few or no moving parts, so highly dependable and reliable.
Sandy
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
Kirk,
BTW, if possible rent or borrow a Sony a7r iv for your tests. The a7r iii is a very good camera but the pixel shifting mode of the a7r iv is more powerful, and results in much higher effective resolution, than that of the a7r iii.
The increase in actual resolution with pixel shifting is something that I would not have imagined, or believed, until I tested it myself with a high resolution USAF target, and found that the theoretical limit with the a7r iv and 16 shot pixel shifting was in the 175-200 lpm range, almost 2x what would be possible with the sensor in regular shooting mode.
Sandy
For discussion and information about carbon transfer please visit the carbon group at groups.io
[url]https://groups.io/g/carbon
Thanks, Sandy. That's very kind of you to say.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks