Hi all, I happened on this excellent forum by chance-looking for a decent macro lens to scan with.
I have a Fuji X-S20 camera which I believe might have a crop sensor.
I have already invested in the Valoi 360 pro scanning kit and was looking for a macro lens that with an adaptor I could use on that camera with an adaptor manual focus is ok for me as my first camera was a Pentax K1000.
I had a Canon EF50mm macro lens in mind as now budget is a bit limited, and I’m going to convert my old Durst 35 enlarger to mount the Fuji.
Am I OK in my assumptions that this lens will scan both formats?
Welcome to the forum. Firstly you do indeed have an APS-C ‘crop’ sensor camera and that means that old film era macro lenses will work slightly better for copying film than they would on a full frame camera. However you wouldn’t be looking at an EF Macro lens as EF lenses have no manual aperture settings, I’m thinking that you mean the Canon f3.5 50mm FD Macro. You will also need an FD extension tube to copy 35mm on to APS-C, around 10mm, but if you buy it with its own Canon FD 25mm extension ring that will be fine as you siply don’t extend the lens as much with its own focus ring. Another widely recommended lerns is the 55mm Micro-Nikkor f2.8, also with a short extension tube. Both of these lenses will work very well for copying 35mm and Medium Format. For 645, 6x6 & 6x7 you will lose some from the sides as the aspect ratio is different, you’ll lose the most with 6x6 of course.
Many thanks Harry for your prompt and detailed reply.
I will check out those lenses and report back here. I had spoken to a used camera dealer who’d told me about the Canon EF 50mm, maybe I misunderstood some aspect of it.
I don’t know that lens I’m afraid, it could be but standard ‘Macro’ lenses don’t necessarily have the flat field required for copying film at close distances.
Micro Nikkor 55/3.5 seems to come up a lot. What adaptors would I need to go to X-Mount with this lens? and I read someone saying about a spacer as well-that I don’t understand but think it’s something to do with 1:1 and 1:2 magnification, which presumably I need depending on which format I’m scanning.
I should also add, if there is a lens better for 120 and one better for 35mm, I might consider that not to have to crop anything later.
@semmyroundel , many posts deal with lenses for scanning and you can get a load of hints if you search the forum.
Unless you want to stitch images, your negatives will not require 1/1 e.g. 135 format negatives require 1/1.5 or about 0,65 if we consider scanning some of the film base too.
Your sensor has an aspect ratio of roughly 2:3, your negatives could also include 1:1, 3:4 and other ratios. Aspect ratio mismatch means that you don’t use your sensor fully or that you need to crop when scanning or stitch scans.
Again, search the forum for these things…it also helps to advance your membership.
I can see that the terminology might be confusing at first, partly because the terms used to describe both magnification and aspect ratio are, or can be, the same but they are very different things.
Aspect ratio describes the shape, either of your sensor or of the subject you are photographing. Your sensor has a 3:2 aspect ratio as it is 23.5 x 15.6 mm in size, precisely the same aspect ratio as a full frame sensor or indeed a 35mm negative which are both 36mm x 24mm.
A 6x6 frame of 120 medium format film is a square so has a 1:1 aspect ratio.
A 6x7 frame of 120 medium format film is typically 67mm x 56mm so has a 6:5 aspect ratio.
Both would leave some wasted ‘real estate’ on your sensor to the left and right.
In fact , now that you have explained it, the penny’s dropped on what you mean so thank you for that detailed info.
I’ve had a quick look at that video, and I’ll sit down and watch it in earnest later as it seems to mirror my requirements exactly, even down to the Valoi setup plus Cinestill light source.
The only thing that I don’t know is what lens to use, I don’t mind cropping down an image, but stitching is a bit beyond my capabilities, especially as I’m keen to digitise some of my dad’s old 6x9 negatives.
Hopefully, focal lengths are covererd in the video too.
I’m glad you found it useful. He is using the Canon FD 50mm f3 5 Macro which I think would do you very well for both formats but you can see what he says about it. You just need an easily available Fuji to Canon FD adapter, often called FX to FD.
Aspect Ratio Mismatch: Imagine your film going from left to right.
Rectangles show a full frame sensor (red rectangle) in its normal orientation
and rotated by 90 degrees (green rectangle) and negative outlines (in blue)
Scanning 120 film produces some loss greater than or equal to figures shown below.
(follow the red diagonals and see where they intersect with the red rectangle;
following that line is like zooming out from 1/1 to whatever is needed to best match the negative)
No loss if you scan 6x9 negatives
2/9 sensor area loss when scanning 6x7 negatives
3/9 sensor area loss when scanning 6x6 negatives
50% loss when scanning 645 negatives without changing orientation - or
only 1/9 loss when scanning 645 negatives with camera or film rotated
Sidenote: Micro 4/3 and GFX sensors match 645 negatives perfectly.
Hi Digitizer, many thanks for that. To explain, I have some form of number/word dislexia that makes understanding concepts in abstract difficult (I don’t like mentioning it as too many harp on seemingly nowadays), but anyway, your diagram plus Harry’s description have completely nailed it for me, I fully understand now.
To that end, I lucked out as I’m one of those that never throws anything away, and I found a Panasonic DMC-G3 in my collection. I never got on with it especially with the 45-200 zoom.
So maybe with the equipment that Kyle McDougall mentioned in his video (I’ve ordered the lens, extension tube and X-mount adaptor already) and another adaptor FD-M4/3 I’m guessing? I can then cover that format with the Lumix.
The only fly in the ointment is that the DMC-G3 is only 16mp, but based on what Kyle said in his video, that doesn’t seem to be an issue.
My father who was SOE in WW2, took lots of photos for British intelligence (including the scant damage done by the Dambuster’s raid), left a few rolls of 120 roll film, most developed, but some not. So I’m hoping to see some interesting images (he died 20 years ago and was notably silent on his activities for intelligence, so I don’t know what I might find).
Obviously, like most I have family 35mm negs to digitise as well.
Still good enough - unless you want to print billboard sized posters.
The downside of Micro 4/3 is the relatively small sensor and the noise that comes with it. Don’t use anything but the base iso setting. B&W is less of a problem and old film has bigger grain too.
If you fall in love with Micro 4/3 for medium format more recent models can have pixel-shift to dramatically (and easily) boost the number of pixels but certainly 16MP will give you a good sized print for most purposes.
To be honest, I love my X-S20, I previously bought the X-10, then the X-30, both of which I still have and the film simulation gives photos a lovely analogue look, problem is I do a lot of video and they would hunt on focus, but the X-S20 (maybe because it’s a vlogger’s camera is better for that).
Just one last question for now, what effect would a 40mm macro lens have on the APS-C and M4/3 cameras in regard to scanning and the in particular, the medium formats?
In that case I’d say that you don’t really need to use your 16MP Panasonic as the 26MP Fuji will provide more megapixels whatever format you will be copying. Are your father’s medium format images 6x6?
Incidentally you said that not all of these films have been developed! Getting these developed is a pretty specialist task.
A 40mm lens will work for both formats on APS-C but will it be as good as that 50mm Canon FD macro? I think probably not, the 40mm ttArtisans Macro is listed by Valoi as a budget option here, which isn’t a resounding endorsement.
