Hi, Is someone know if I can get near 1:1 reproduction ratio using the two Fuji extension tubes with my 56mm? I'am looking for a set-up for digitalizing my B&W negatives. After trying few scanners in the under 1000$ range, I know I can do better using one of my Fuji cameras. I already get amazing results but looking to use most of the xpro2 sensor instead of around 2000x3000px area. As I already have the 56 and the 16mm extension tube, buying the 11mm tube will be much cheaper than buying the 60 or even the 80 macro lens... Thanks
56mm+two extension tubes...Rapport 1:1?
Posted 27 November 2017 - 05:51 PM
So I assume nobody here know the answer...I ordered the 11mm tube. We will see. But I got another problem : grid artifact! Photographing negatives implies a strong front light so I noticed a grid pattern when looking at my files at 100%. I tried few things to minimize that without any amelioration. I supposed that it was a result of the absence of anti-aliasing filter. As last attempt, I change from RAW (that I always use) to JPEG and...no more grid! The camera correct perfectly the more than annoying grid artifact and deliver a perfect jpeg. Alleluia.
Posted 27 November 2017 - 06:13 PM
Hi, Is someone know if I can get near 1:1 reproduction ratio using the two Fuji extension tubes with my 56mm?... Thanks
It was tested over here - https://www.markusra.../punks-of-macro
There is no direct answer about 1:1, but some sample shots was provided.
Posted 05 December 2017 - 09:35 PM
After intensive testing of coupling the two Fuji extension tubes together with my 56mm, I had to conclude that it's unusable for critical reproduction work. The ratio was really good, allowing framing a little bit larger than the 24x36mm negatives. But the sides and corners were always unsharp, independently of the aperture used. My goal is to «scan» a large quantity of B&W 35mm negatives using my x-Pro2. I now must turn to macro lenses to achieve the near 1:1 ratio with the pro quality I know I can get.
Posted 07 December 2017 - 09:37 AM
I have tried shooting pictures of my slides and negatives in many ways ( 60mm macro lens, adapted 100mm macro lens, slide repro-tube, enlarging lens on a macro bellows)
The results were always relatively disappointing.
Mileage might vary but don’t set your expectations too high. By the way the loss of focus on the sides might be cause by the curvature of the slide or negative.
Edited by milandro, 07 December 2017 - 11:14 AM.
the popular expression wishful thinking is an oxymoron!
To all TAPATALK users
Posted 09 December 2017 - 06:54 PM
It was tested by the guy behind Fuji vs Fuji blog, on a set of lenses, with examples: https://www.fujivsfu...-11-vs-mcex-16/
But I doubt the 56mm can be a very good macro lens. That's really not its purpose, and macro extension rings are sadly limited by the laws of physics. My advice would be to use a dedicated macro lens. For scanning slides, perhaps a 1:2 would be enough? In that case, buy the 60mm from Fuji. It's small, sharp, awesome and is now easy to be found used, thanks to the newer 80mm.
Otherwise, if you need 1:1, there are different options:
- Native lenses: Fuji 80/2.8 (but far too expansive if you just want to scan slides), Samyang 100/2.8 (cheaper), Zeiss Touit 50/2.8, Meike 85mm (I think it's new too)
- Adapted lenses from other brands. You can mount barely anything from Nikon, Canon, Tamron, Sigma... The old (and the new) 90mm lenses from Tamron are great 1:1 macro lenses (the oldest models are only 1:2 though), and can be found used in lots of different mounts.
- The Raynox adapters. You don't get the quality of a dedicated macro lens, but you get close and it's not too expansive.
Edited by konzy, 09 December 2017 - 06:56 PM.