Nikon D850 for digitizing

[Andprayforrain]

Does anyone know how well a Nikon D850 (or any comparable digital camera) scans BW negs compared with a Nikon COOLSCAN V?

The COOLSCAN has an effective resolution of 3,900 pixels per inch, so it can obtain enough info for a 20” print with 275 pixels per inch, or a 16” print with 345 pixels per inch. That’s about 20.4 megapixels.

I have no problem with the amount of detail the COOLSCAN can obtain. However, I do have a problem with the amount of grain aliasing it produces, which can become excessive when processing low-contrast and other less-than-ideal negatives. Generally, the more contrast that must be added, the more apparent the aliasing, and every COOLSCAN file from a BW neg requires a significant boost in contrast.

So:

• Can a D850 with, say, an AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED obtain greater detail versus the COOLSCAN?
• Does the D850 do a noticeably better job of rendering grain?

More generally:

• On the overall scale of scanning--from consumer level scanners, through COOLSCANs, through Hasselblad scanners, to drum scanners--how does D850 scanning generally rate?
• Does anyone have close-up examples of BW negative grain scanned using the D850 versus that using a scanner comparable to the COOLSCAN V?

I refer specifically to the D850 because I’m considering getting one. Feel free to refer to any other comparable camera.

 

[Scottboarding]

So I can't speak for the D850 or a coolscan, but I can say that when I used my D750 for scanning the resolution absolutely blew me away. I never noticed any issues with aliasing, but then again different sensors might have different effects. Huss would be the expert on the D850 since he uses that and a Z7 (same sensor I believe) so hopefully he will come visit this thread.


Since you're talking about the 60mm I highly recommend the ES-2 adapter. It's expensive for what it is, but it makes scanning way easier and I wouldn't scan 35mm without it.

 

[Dogman]

I've been using first a D800 and then a D810 to digitize some B&W negatives and the results have been excellent--at least to my eyes. I've never used a Coolscan so I cannot comment on the quality there. I had some scans I had done with an old HP Smartscan back in the dark ages and the results from the camera blew them away. I've also compared my images to images posted online by people using various scanners and mine looks better to me. More shadow detail was captured along with decent whites and midtones. Also, they're plenty sharp. The images were fairly easy to work with in Lightroom but be sure to clean the negatives and be prepared to use the Clone/Heal brush. Dust will be there no matter what you do.

Years ago when I shot film and scanned to make prints, I hated the entire process. I would never have thought I would ever start doing it again but using a camera is the way to go in my opinion. The 60mm Micro-Nikkor is what I use with the Nikon ES-2 Digitizer. I'm not obsessive about the process. I just put the negatives in the holder, attach to the ES-2 and take the rig outside, set the lens to ƒ/8 or so and point it at a bright sky to make my exposures using aperture priority. It's quick and simple.

Huss will probably be able to give you better info. His posts about scanning with a digital camera is what got me into trying it to begin with.

 

[Huss]

I don't know about the tech specifics but I used a D850 and now a Z7 to scan film and they are fantastic. As was my D750.
I have gallery prints at 40x30 at the Palm Springs Art Festival this weekend, represented by the Brittany Davis Galery.
There is no diff between the 850 and Z7 for scanning quality. I just traded because I thought I would be adapting lenses etc but often wish I stuck with the 850 as it works much better with old AIS lenses...(but not as good w Sigma Art)

One huge upside about getting a camera to scan, is that not only are they great for scanning BUT... they also can be used as cameras! With no issue for parts, maintenance , software etc etc

 

[valdas]

I don't know about the tech specifics but I used a D850 and now a Z7 to scan film and they are fantastic. As was my D750.
I have gallery prints at 40x30 at the Palm Springs Art Festival this weekend, represented by the Brittany Davis Galery.
There is no diff between the 850 and Z7 for scanning quality. I just traded because I thought I would be adapting lenses etc but often wish I stuck with the 850 as it works much better with old AIS lenses...(but not as good w Sigma Art)

One huge upside about getting a camera to scan, is that not only are they great for scanning BUT... they also can be used as cameras! With no issue for parts, maintenance , software etc etc

A question to an expert - are there any issues with dust/scratches? Do you deal with it in post processing?

 

[Huss]

Fuji C200 scanned with Z7 (same as I got from the D850)



1:1 crop - check out the tattoos on the kid's arm!



This image is 8300px wide (the Rez of the sensor) so will print huge. Any lack of image quality here is thanks to Flickr. On my computer (and in print) they look much better.

What is key is to use the D850 (or any digicam if you can) in LiveView mode as it will AF focus on the grain. I used a Nikon 60 2.8G lens for this, but with the D850 got the same results w the D lens. Only reason I changed is because Nikon's stupid dumb FTZ adapter does not AF with D lenses, only G and up.

 

[Huss]

A question to an expert - are there any issues with dust/scratches? Do you deal with it in post processing?

Careful handling of the negs. Use a Rocket Blower brush. Then may have to clone out a spot or two in post.

 

[css9450]

I agree with all of the above. I've used my D750 and even my D7000 with great results. I too use the 60mm/f2.8 but mine is the older, non-AFS version. All B&W by the way.... I've never attempted color. And yes, the clone tool comes in handy afterward.

 

[Andprayforrain]

Thanks, everyone. Much food for thought.

 

[KM-25]

I don't know about the tech specifics but I used a D850 and now a Z7 to scan film and they are fantastic. As was my D750.
I have gallery prints at 40x30 at the Palm Springs Art Festival this weekend, represented by the Brittany Davis Galery.
There is no diff between the 850 and Z7 for scanning quality. I just traded because I thought I would be adapting lenses etc but often wish I stuck with the 850 as it works much better with old AIS lenses...(but not as good w Sigma Art)

One huge upside about getting a camera to scan, is that not only are they great for scanning BUT... they also can be used as cameras! With no issue for parts, maintenance , software etc etc

I have had the same experience, sold my scanner years ago because I saw the writing on the wall with it. That being said, as easy as black and white and transparency is to scan, I am still not 100% with color neg due to the orange mask.

Is there anything new out there to overcome this? I wish Nikon would make a scan setting under picture settings, it would make it a ton easier to correct.

 

[Andprayforrain]

...I am still not 100% with color neg due to the orange mask.

Is there anything new out there to overcome this? I wish Nikon would make a scan setting under picture settings, it would make it a ton easier to correct.

Negative Lab Pro looks amazing, based on examples I've seen on YouTube and the one conversion I did using the trial version.

 

[Huss]

I have had the same experience, sold my scanner years ago because I saw the writing on the wall with it. That being said, as easy as black and white and transparency is to scan, I am still not 100% with color neg due to the orange mask.

Is there anything new out there to overcome this? I wish Nikon would make a scan setting under picture settings, it would make it a ton easier to correct.

I use negativelabpro.com.

Fuhgedabout that orange mask!

 

[KM-25]

I use negativelabpro.com.

Fuhgedabout that orange mask!

Nice, I knew someone would do this. I have a Sinar P2 camera with multiple stages setup for a portable mural enlarger and scanning station, I stitch 120 and 4x5 film into massive single DNG files and can now import them into this software for perfect output!

Thanks a bundle!!

 

[Andprayforrain]

Any lack of image quality here is thanks to Flickr.

Thanks, Huss. Is Flickr causing the halos and graininess visible in the crop showing the skateboarders, or did your camera produce them?

 

[Huss]

Thanks, Huss. Is Flickr causing the halos and graininess visible in the crop showing the skateboarders, or did your camera produce them?

That's the Flickr algorithms for the halos.

You will see the grain because it is a 1:1 crop of a film image. But it is cleaner/sharper outside Flickr.