The Epson V500 vs Coolscan 5000 vs Panasonic G3 + macro lens

[dfatty]

thanks for all the testing, very interesting. scanning is kryptonite to my film process, your results really make me want to rig up something with a digibody and macro lens.

 

[philipus]

Thanks for the interesting comparison Chris. Not knowing much about the Epson flatbeds except what I've read online, a simple setup with an inexpensive digital camera seems to give better results.

About the colour speckling you mentioned. This is the one thing I dislike about the Coolscans (I have a V and a 9000) and it is one of the main reasons I am shooting more reversal than colour neg these days. Sometimes I play around with the Noise Reduction filter in Photoshop which gives OK control over the process to reduce the colour noise but it isn't a great solution. Noise Ninja would be better, probably.

I did a little test when I owned a 5D2 and posted a few quick results in this LUF thread. Once my scanners die I don't exclude that I'll go the digitizing route using whatever good SLR is available then.

Btw what software did you use with the Coolscan?

Cheers
Philip

 

[Sid836]

A quick question, how can we ensure that the focal plane of the camera is parallel to the film plane?
I have been doing "scans" with my DSLR (D90 + Nikon Micro 40mm) and my biggest problem is that I cannot align my camera's sensor plane completely parallel to the film resulting to some out of focus edge.

 

[philipus]

A quick question, how can we ensure that the focal plane of the camera is parallel to the film plane?

Would Michael Darnton's suggestion in post #12 work on your setup?

 

[Sid836]

Would Michael Darnton's suggestion in post #12 work on your setup?

Indeed! I have missed that reading the rest of the comparison. Thank you!

 

[Gregoyle]

Sorry I'm an idiot, I forgot to mention that is Adox CMS 20 stand developed in Perfection XR-1 (way too thin, needs less dilution for better results, but still manages high detail, would probably require grade 5 printing in the dark room), not Tri-X, the point was while you need MF digital at it's best to beat this light weight cheap equipment combo (sans scanner), that that isn't everything and I still really enjoy Tri-X with it's grain and all.
.

My first thought was "oh, CMS 20, of course, but that barely counts." Then I remembered that it was taken with a camera and lens combo that I have seen for $20 at thrift stores.

Then I remembered that if you *do* compare it to medium format digital, you have to take into account depth of field. While CMS 20 is about 2.5 stops slower than the ASA 100 that most MF backs shoot at, the DOF is nearly the same based on the focal length of the lenses you will be using.

Love this thread!

-Greg