[Alex Ethridge]

Has anyone here used a digital SLR to digitize 35mm mounted slides?

If so, I have some questions for you.

When digital photography was still just a dream, I duplicated slides using a slide duplicating attachment that fit on the front of my 35mm camera. I would fit each slide onto the front of the duplicator's barrel and snap a picture of the slide. Average time per slide was about 20 seconds.

Slide scanners are just too slow--about 3 minutes per slide. And with the 15,000 slides I must digitize, that figures to 750 hours--totally unacceptable.

I'm looking for advice from someone WHO HAS ALREADY DONE this VERY THING but with a digital SLR.

[buck52]

Howdy

I made my own slide holder and set it up in front, 3 or 4 inches, of a backlit white paper. then set the dslr on a tripod adjusted for full frame, and it worked quite well after fiddling to get the white balance right...

I believe xgerryx made a holder from a colkin filter holder that mounts right on the lens with good results as well

Not sure I would set out to do 15,000 slides but that's of course your choice...

seems there must be a slide scanner that can atleast automate the process even if it can't speed it up... maybe to expensive though

buck

[xgerryx]

Hi Alex

Have a look at this thread http://forums.techguy.org/digital-photography-imaging/334920-slides-digital-scanner-camera.html #14 I wasn't using an slr but I still got a satisfactory result.

[Alex Ethridge]

I looked at the thread. The advantage of the old method was that it compensated for the curved field of the film being duped by using a small aperture. Also, all extraneous light was blocked out by the duplicator's barrel.

The advantage of the old method was that it compensated for the curved field of the slide's surface by using a small aperture. My old one was an f22. Also, all extraneous light was blocked out by the duplicator's barrel. And, distance adjustments weren't a problem as is with a tripod and work table setup.

See one here; but, these are for analog and a 50% gain in focal lenght is gained when an analog lens is attached to a digital SLR so using one of these on a digital camera will result in a full one-third loss on every image.

Thanks for the replies; I'm still looking.

[etaf]

yep, i guess you are going to have a problem - I have a slide copier for a film SLR and with the various crop factors {field of view} I'm not sure how that will work on a DSL with a smaller sensor
typically Canon 300D, 350D, 20D have a x1.6 crop
IDMKII - i think is full frame so that will work

whats the make/model of your DSLR??

I have seen this discussed on other forums and dont remember the crop factor being an issue - strange

and 15,000 wow thats a lot of work - the lightening would change depending on the density of the slides too, i guess.

you can get film scanners with loaders - Nikon do make one

[Alex Ethridge]

With the old film-type SLR I had years ago, lighting was no problem. It had TTL flash metering. All I had to do was set the camera to TTL dedicated flash and the exposure compensation was marvelously accurate for absolutely every slide regardless of good or poor lighting on the original.

If I had an actual 1:1 reproduction ratio on the slide duplicator and a dedicated TTL metered flash on this Nikon DSLR, it would work the same as it did with film. But it appears to be that the duplicator for digital (like the one I had for film) doesn't exist.

I'm beginning to be paranoid. I'm beginning to think the makers of slide scanners are paying the makers of duplicators not to make one.

By the way, the crop factor is about the same on all DSLRs built on a 35mm frame.

I'm going to see what Nikon has in the line of macro and/or slide duplication equipment for their DSLRs. In the past, all the comparisons I did with the very simple $60 duplicator against the unnecessarily elaborate Nikon duplicator put my $60 duplicator ahead of the elaborate Nikon equipment which, at the time, cost six to eight times as much.

[Persian-Rice]

Crop factor has nothing to do with anything here........and they are not the same.

Basically, with the crop factor, you will be forced to put the slide further away from the camera to get a full sized crop. Crop factor basically, to keep it simple virtually increases focal length by cropping the full image. So you need to mount your slide further out.

As for what has what. All the Canon prosumer stuff have 1.6. 1D Mark II/1D has 1.3 and the 1Ds Mark II/1Ds have 1:1 full frame sensor.

In this case, you would be wise to buy a film scanner, you would be crazy to even try to do 15,000 slides the other way. You can also pay your local lab to do it, but it's pretty expensive.

Cheers

[linskyjack]

Basically, with the crop factor, you will be forced to put the slide further away from the camera to get a full sized crop. Crop factor basically, to keep it simple virtually increases focal length by cropping the full image. So you need to mount your slide further out.


Yup, as you said it has nothing to do with anything---LOL---so why does he have to put his slide further away from the frame so that he has to mount it further out---Answer, because crop factor does make a difference!!!!!

[etaf]

i have not tried my EOS slide duplicator on a EOS DSLR, so do not know if it extend enough to get the full frame slide.
but your right about one thing, 15,000 slides is going to take some time.
say at 40 and hour - assuming fast recycle time of flash, and a good picture first time etc
thats still 375 hours - over a months work working 8hrs a day every day - WOW!!!!!

and storage 6mb camera on RAW - say 6mb per picture 90,000MB
90GB - 20+ dvd's to write
however, if you scan them in in TIFF format from a film scanner then each picture will probably be around 28MB - thats on a Nikon LS30 MKiii 2700optical resolution and full resolution and lossless
420GB
100DVD's

a big project - good luck

I would also advise to at least make to DVD copies

[buck52]

Originally Posted by Persian-Rice

Crop factor has nothing to do with anything here........



Cheers

are you advanced or just guessing?

As linskyjack pointd out... crop factor is what it's all about...

The slide duplicator that alex has, was made for a full frame 35mm analog camera... on the DSLR Nikon the amount of image loss is significant

I believe alex is looking for the same type of setup for digital...It would have to acount for the crop factor ...to the best of my knowledge not available...

Alex My thought is that if you are instistent on
doing this yourself... then make a controlled lighting setup with the lens of your choice...mine would be my Tamron 90 Macro... set it up so you can duplicate it... I won't type any more details on how I would set it up because I don't think you care...take no offense

buck

[Alex Ethridge]

buck52,

It's nice to see that at least two people here understand the crop factor and how sensor size vs, film plane size factors into that.

I have done an exhaustive search of the internet, via Google, and I've come to the conclusion that a duplicator of the type I used for analog cameras is not available for a DSLR.

I've begun to search for a DSLR Macro/Micro lens with a flat field of focus. For this, I will make my own attachable barrel with a slide mount at its end. But, I have already run into a problem there also. I have not yet seen such a lens for a DSLR available from any manufacturer.

Of course, I could use an analog lens for this purpose; it would give me full control to decrease the image size to compensate for the crop factor as well as increase the size for cropping. But, that would be a waste of money as after the job was finished, the lens, being analog, would be of no further use to me.

For those who might not know, the analog duplicator I used allowed for a 1:1 or larger image reproduction. Going smaller isn't an option. Factor in that the sensor on a DSLR is much smaller than a 24mm by 36mm analog film plane and you have the unavoidable crop even at the duplicator's 1:1 setting. And for those who might not know, these analog devices do not allow for changing of distances. That is already rigidly built in to allow for 1:1 to 2:1 or anywhere in between and those ratios apply only when using a camera with a 24mm by 36mm film plane.

[linskyjack]

Alex, you have an interesting problem--I'm doing a little research on a lens with a flat field of focus. By the way, you might take this over to www.fredmiranda.com---go to the pro forum and ask the same question you asked at the top of the thread--you just might find someone with an answer. Anyhow, let us know how things go, I find it to be an interesting problem.

[linskyjack]

Sorry---the link picked up the ---go---just type in your address bar www.fredmiranda.com That should do it.

[Alex Ethridge]

Thanks.

I already got there and posted.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/246919/0#2040257

[linskyjack]

Good post but most of the guys in macro are just shooting insects and stuff--I would also post in Pro-corner---Anyhow, I'll watch the threads.