I’m just getting started with scanning/copying my negatives and slides using a digital camera (Nikon D500 initially but have available a D7200). I have a Negative Supply copy stand rig which mounts the camera to a bracket that is slid up and down on the column. I need to level the camera sensor to be parallel with the film plane, but there is no direct way to do this. Next best that I’ve come up with is to level, or set my digital angle cube to zero on the copy stand base and then put the angle cube on the back of the camera body to read its orientation and adjust from there. My question is whether it is safe to assume the back frame of the Live View display is an adequate surrogate for the sensor?
To use the digital angle cube on the back of the camera, I have placed a precision ground metal plate that spans the width of the Live View frame and placed the angle cube on that. It is easy to rotate the angle cube plate because the angle cube has magnets on the bottom and sides, so those form one solid unit.
I have and have tried the little plastic levels that fit in the hot shoe, but my sense is there is far lower precision than the angle cube offers, as long as the Live View frame is close enough to parallel with the sensor plane. One uncertainty about this on the D500 is that the Live View panel pivots out, but it does seem to snap back in solidly.
You may notice the NiSi Focus Rail between the stand column and camera. I do not like the stock camera bracket, nor do I like that the height adjustment of the stock copy stand is entirely manual, unclamp/move/reclamp. I am working on an adapter to mount the focus rail to the column so I have the leadscrew for adjusting the camera height. I want this for more control over framing of the negatives/slides on the sensor (viewfinder).
Hi there, welcome to the forum. Without knowing how accurate the digital level is I would still think that you’re probably OK doing it that way. However it looks a bit time consuming, and more importantly it is still an indirect measurement. Much better to use a mirror to reflect an image of your lens. It is then fairly easy to be very precise. A possible issue is that you need to be able to move the camera, or change the focus on the lens to deal with twice the normal distance, down to the mirror and back to the lens.
The Nisi rail is a great addition, others have used it or a version of it using the same principle. I would recommend using an adjustable base under your film holder to adjust for alignment, even just a board with card shims, though others use such things as geared heads.
Thanks for the welcome. The angle cube is actually quite accurate. I’m a machinist and have tested it against traditional methods for precision angle setting, sine blocks, precision machined angle plates and the like. The angle cube was as good or better than all of them. It is my go-to method for angle setting. It is also the fastest and easiest of them all. It is FAR better than the little plastic level cube that fits into the hot shoe.
I’m not familiar with the mirror method, but I’d like to find out. Where can I find information on it? Not sure how it will work if the camera/lens has to be moved, as that might change the “level” achieved in the lower position required. (Edit: upon reflection, if the focusing rail discussed below is set up right, raising and lowering the camera should not alter the level setting. And, I have found an article about using the mirror method and it does sound like the best method. Not to find an appropriate mirror.)
In regard to your other reply, about the NiSi rail, I think it will work to build in the adjustment into the adapter that will attach the rail to the copy stand column. It will incorporate adjustment on two vertical axes.
I have a geared head, but I’ve not tested it to see if it can adjust in fine enough increment, because it is too large to fit with this copy stand. (Edit: I have since tested the geared head and it is quite sensitive and very easy/effective. I’d like to use it, but will have to buy or build a larger copy stand.)
Note that it is important to align the negative and the sensor. Absolute alignment in relation to gravity doesn’t matter.
BTW: Nisi rails have those threads for feet. All you need now is some perforated plate(s) that can attach to the rail and to the column with fitting screws and a couple of slot nuts…or one or preferably two arca style clamps holding the rail. For adjustment, you could add tape to compensate tilt or use blades of a feeler gauge set…if the column is sturdy enough to make it worthwhile.
I’ve been in touch with Lester Lefkowitz on this effort, as well as here, which is where I got the idea for the geared head. I have both of his excellent books on Close-Up and Macro Photography. What wonderful resources these are. I realized the simple pipe and board copy stand, Manfroto super clamp, geared head and NiSi focusing rail was a far sturdier, more practical and effective combination than the Negative Supply basic stand that I was trying to work with. Only an hour or so to build the stand. Assembling the parts was a breeze as well. Very easy to align in all planes and the focus rail does indeed work for maintaining alignment when the camera is run up and down. The model I have has a quick release button for rapid movement along the rail; one rotation of the dial yields 1mm of travel.
The two tools I find reliable for this purpose are the Zig-align (Zig-Align Mirror Kits for Parallelism) and the Versalab Parallel (PARALLEL). Both deliver accurate results when used correctly. It also helps to have a media platform whose height is precisely adjustable at each of the four corners such that either of those two tools will indicate when the height of the feet is giving you an exactly parallel state between media and sensor.
…kind of expensive compared to a simple mirror (2 to 3 inches square or round) that is usually available in DIY and art supply shops.
The usual mirrors have the reflective layer behind the glass. This reflects light as it were from the surface the mirror is put on. To check for unevenness, rotate the mirror by 180 degrees. If nothing changes in your finder, all is well.
Note that the mirror is the means to align the optical axis perpendicularly to the object plane. If the lens is not properly aligned in itself and in relation to the sensor, differences can show up e.g. with targets like Vlad’s. A mirror can’t do this, but it’s really easy for adjusting the optical axis (of the lens).
Hi Digitizer, ya it costs more than just a mirror, but it’s really convenient to work with and tests for the alignment of the whole system from media through the lens to the sensor just by looking at the straightness of the tunnel it creates in the viewfinder/LED screen when adjusting the alignment. It consists of two mirrors - one circular in a filter with a hole in the center that screws onto the lens, and another that sits where the media should be (for this one can use any good quality mirror). It’s been around for a long time and as far as I know many serious photographers at least in North America use them.
using two mirrors amplifies any deviation, a smart move. Still too expensive for my taste. If (my) money were unlimited, I’d probably get a Phase One CH solution and employ someone to do the scanning. Well, that is an extreme position, but alas, my income is limited …
… and I enjoy building the rig(s) more than doing the scanning…
OK, I hear you. When I bought mine the cost was tolerable, but I see the basic set is now $144. BTW, you and I had this discussion already with “ctorres” back in October of last year. Time flies…
Rick I have used the mirror method and did not find it intuitive at first. Use multiple methods to verify. When using a level on the camera also use it on the copy surface!
Here’s another option. Use a lag bolt or a screw. I quickly used my phone here because it’s faster. One difference you will notice, depending on magnification, is depth of field. In some cases, you might need to rack focus top to bottom of the screw to be sure!
**Place the bolt in the center of the viewfinder ** Make sure the tip of the screw is centered over the head. Use a 1/4 or 3/8 lag bolt, or even a deck screw. This will not work if it is off center in the viewfinder. Rotate the camera in both axis until it’s straight
Not sure what you’re balancing your screw on here, you have to check alignment with the actual film plane. You find this better than using a mirror?
A mirror (or two mirrors) is the only direct way to confirm alignment, everything else is indirect. I’m happy with one mirror but I appreciate that two mirrors is the gold standard.
I find that advice to beginners should be simple and easy. Dont want to discourage someone with too much of anything. Perhaps more detail should have been given. I assumed that everyone would understand that the screw should be perpendicular to the copy surface and it must be centered to avoid perspective distortion. A flat head screw is critical, dont use a round or an oval head. Most deck screws are flat head. Yes, a lag bolt might not have a flat top given there is embossed labeling on the surfae.
Deck screws work great for me. Use the longest screw that fits in your working space (front of lens to image surface). It handles both axis at once, nice when using a ball head. I would not use a level unless I had a 3 axis geared tripod head. With a ball head once X is level, it might get bumped when setting Y.
I’m not against the mirror method and remember using it. I also remember thinking it was not very precise. I don’t have the best memory so I will revisit it! I’m intrigued by the two mirror method and will probably test that. Thing is, how important is being deadly accurate? I would guess that if copying 11x14 prints or 4x5 negatives it’s very important. Frames of 16mm film or 110, not so much. I have a lot of 35mm, some 24mm (APS), and 620 that my parents used. I still have their camera, a Brownie Target six-20. Not the best lens to produce critical negatives!
So many opportunities for inaccuracy with that ‘rod’ method that you linked to, baffling as if he’d used a mirror he could have got perfect alignment directly, quickly and intuitively. He was photographing a 15” x 22” chart which he has made up from different elements, rather reminiscent of the way that Vlad Serebryany makes his original test chart in fact which he then photographs to create the Vlad Test Targets.
Alignment when copying small film formats is actually hugely critical.
I think the laser levels i use to shoot test targets is not really applicable here. But there is something i explored in 2022 and while results were encouraging , nothing beats the simplicity of mirror method. I do hate that i need to refocus to get lens reflection sharp, but this is a minor issue.
Another method is based on using collimator for telescope tuning. Collimator emits laser beam thru the small opening and your task as operator to have beam reflected back in the same opening. If you manage to collect various adapters to put collimator instead of you lens - you are golden. the setup is really easy with mirror or without. See picture
and bunch of adapters was another $20. But honestly i never went back to use this on everyday basis.
One reason was that lens is much heavier than collimator, so when i swap collimator for lens - if the setup is not really rigid- the alignment gets broken.
Yes, I only mentioned lasers and your chart setup because this rod/screw method was originally inspired by an article recommending it for photographing a chart for lens testing purposes, link above.
THANK YOU Harry!
Information on camera alignment with a mirror is sparce and I have spent hours searching online. I did find 2 YouTube videos, but still left without understanding. However This video by allen y dslr film scanner mirror leveling method, was interesting but still left me scratching my head. He shows how to use the aperature. But just like most explinations I find, they’re written for people who already understand. I didn’t, I must be dumber than the average bear.
Anyway, now I understand! Using the aperature stopped down to f22 or f16 gives a far better target for estimating the the center of the lens.
But, it is also tedious, not unlike the deck screw. Sometimes the aperature is deep withing the lens. It’s hard to light and focus on. I’m thinking of adding a stepup ring to the lens and marking the 4 quadrants to line up with the viewfinder’s grid.
