Jump to content
Denali3times

56mm+two extension tubes...Rapport 1:1?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Good luck!

Edited by milandro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was tested by the guy behind Fuji vs Fuji blog, on a set of lenses, with examples: https://www.fujivsfuji.com/mcex-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.

 

Good luck!

 

Konzy

Edited by konzy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you seem to be the right person to ask...

I'm having the same dilema, trying to scan my films (both 35mm and MF) with my xpro2 but without a dedicated fujinon macro lens. I bought a MCEX16 macro adapter but the pincushion distortion is awful. I didn't notice it with MF film but the combo MCEX16 + 56mm lens at working distance slightly crops the negative image so I couldn't really asses the issue so far (the only 'scanned' image so far had no straight lines). I use lomography Digitaliza film holders that do a much better job than regular flatbed scanner holders. 

Is this all because of the adapter (or better said adapted lens)? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Posts

    • Did you changed the setting of connection mode to “USB tether shooting auto“ as the latest user manual?  It is supposed to be working with DJI/ZY new gimbal with USB connection.  I also planned to buy crane m2 as light weight gimbal solution for x-t3 but not tested in the cam shop yet,  Would you help to try it out? 
    • First post, lets see if I can do this...   Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content.
    • I recently bought a second hand Fuji xc 15-45 power zoom lens from a reputable company to go with my Fuji x-m1. The lens made a constant humming/whirring. Do you think this is a fault with the lens, camera or is it normal? The noise wasn't the auto focus. It's now been returned. Not sure whether to replace like for like or any suggestions for a budget replacement.  The original xc 16-50 that came with the camera has broken, hence need for replacement.Thanks
    • Firmware 1.04. and yes I did try a long press
    • Hi  All, A month ago I put an order for XF10 (awaiting delivery and joining Fuji-user family). Today I found out from the shop that they can't get that anymore from Fuji as it has been discontinued.   I was offered X-A5 which I'm yet to check but the reason why I ordered XF10 was the size (and am happy with 18mm F2.8 lens). So I wonder if anybody can recommend pancake lens (MF is fine) which has around 18mm focal length, so the camera can still fit relatively easily in pockets, even if
×
×
  • Create New...