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.
- Torturro likes this
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.
Posted 20 December 2017 - 10:15 PM
OK Guys...the results are absolutely amazing! After trying few macro lens options, I set my preference for a Micro-Nikkor 55mm 2,8 + tube. @Milandro, the curvature of the negative wasn't in the equation as my negative is maintained in place by an enlarger negative carrier. I can now confirm that my negatives reproduction are absolutely perfect. I compared them with some scans I get from a professional lab using a Nikon 5000ED scanner and mines are, way out, better with more tonalities and approximately the same pixel count when using the XPro2.
Here are the useful information if someone goes the same way:
- Only real macro lenses give good to outstanding results
- Micro-Nikkor 55/2,8 is an extraordinary lens
- I didn't test Fuji Macro because of high price and no need of autofocus but I believe it must be excellent
- The negative must be flat so the use of an enlarger negative carrier is mandatory (or similar negative holder)
- The use of a remote trigger is mandatory (I use a cheap remote with cable from Amazon)
- My light source is an old X-Ray light (white balance isn't a problem with B&W negatives)
- The «scan» time is calculated in seconds, not in minutes. Only depend of the time it takes me to change negative in the carrier! WooHoo!
- Cost = zero/scan if I consider that I already have the XPro2 and a friend borrowed me his old 55mm with have a stiff focus ring so was never used. I made myself the reproduction rig with stuff I already had.
Seriously I was hoping the results will be good but they are stunning. When taking time to test and refine all the variables, it works great. Now the only things I still must do is «scanning» 20 years of B&W photography...
- terrapin44 likes this