[ismaelg]

Hello,

It's been over a decade since the last time I used my Yashica Mat124 6x6 TLR. I'm getting the itch to try it again. It may not the best MF out there but it will do until I hit the powerball and get a Pentax 67II or something. But, there is no longer anywhere where I can process them locally. So I'll have to mail to Dwayne's for development, just like I do with my 35mm. However, Dwayne's doesn't scan medium format. I don't have a medium format negative scanner. Even my old 35mm negative scanner is barely adequate. I am looking at some aftermarket film holders that may work with it. While looking into that, is there any medium format scanning service out there?
After all, the idea of medium format is going big.

Thanks,

[dantonvb]

You could use a slide duplicator to digitize with a DSLR. Pentax have a recently introduced and vintage ones. Also, it is easy to DIY an apparatus to mount the negatives or slides.

The new:
Pentax 645 Film Duplicator - Photokina 2014 | PentaxForums.com

---------- Post added 12-01-19 at 09:32 AM ----------

A discussion about this some months ago:
What bellows and slide copier to get? - PentaxForums.com

[Dipsoid]

Get an Epson V600 and do it at home, that's your best bet. Otherwise use your DSLR, and a macro lens and light pad or iPad with an old enlarger/tripod/copy stand. That's what I do and it yields great results, much better than my local lab. Plus I get to control the inversion of negatives. Negative Lab Pro is an amazing plugin for light room and I believe they're running a 10 dollar off deal right now.

[Hank]

DigMyPics - We did my mother's photo archives (a multiyear project) and they took everything from 35mm, ASP, 110, medium format, glass slides, and original prints from the 1800s to scan in.

Convert Slides to Digital Pictures, Slide Scanning Service, 35mm Slides to DVD, Slides to CD,

[TomB_tx]

Dwayne’s has scanned 120 before for me, both 6x6 & 6x7. Their B&W order form does list 120 scanning, and their color negative forms have a note on develop and scan that other negative sizes will vary pricing. For slides their Prints From Slides order form shows 120 scanning also.

[c57d]

Get an Epson V600 and do it at home, that's your best bet. Otherwise use your DSLR, and a macro lens and light pad or iPad with an old enlarger/tripod/copy stand. That's what I do and it yields great results, much better than my local lab. Plus I get to control the inversion of negatives. Negative Lab Pro is an amazing plugin for light room and I believe they're running a 10 dollar off deal right now.

Negative Lab Pro has a Cyber Monday coupon for $10 off.
It's ANALOGMONDAY

Has anyone done a pixel shifted digital image and compared it to a scanned image?
If so, which did you like better (and which scanner did you use)?

Chris

[Dipsoid]

Negative Lab Pro has a Cyber Monday coupon for $10 off.
It's ANALOGMONDAY

Has anyone done a pixel shifted digital image and compared it to a scanned image?
If so, which did you like better (and which scanner did you use)?

Chris

There is someone who uses a K-1 with pixel shift on the "digitizing film with a digital camera" Facebook group and theit results have looked great, although I don't know if they've done any comparisons. From what I've gathered, digitalizing with a camera gives much better results for 35mm, but I'm not sure about larger sizes. I use a K-3 but definitely want to pick up a K-1 or K-P at some point for the pixel shift to see for myself.

[LesDMess]

Negative Lab Pro has a Cyber Monday coupon for $10 off.
It's ANALOGMONDAY

Has anyone done a pixel shifted digital image and compared it to a scanned image?
If so, which did you like better (and which scanner did you use)?

Chris

I've only compared my Coolscan 4000dpi scans of 35mm film to my K20D (15MP) and to a Nikon D800(36MP).
I started off with a frame of film with sufficient detail to distinguish what the scan can resolve as well as not resolve. For the film I used Kodak Techpan shot at ISO25 and developed in Kodak Technidol. To ensure suffient detail for reference I used an 12233 resolution chart arranged 4 high. I used my Pentax LX+Pentax M 50mm f4 macro under optimum settings - tripod, MLU, sufficient lighting and shutter speed and varied apertures. I then scanned/copied the various frames and this is the "best" from the lot although there were actually a few that were equally as good.


Full res -> Kodak Techpan scan compare

The full shot is shown in the bottom left.
The 100% crop of the center area of the K20D copy is above it.
The 100% crop of the center area of the Coolscan 4000dpi scan is above that.
The 100% crop of the center area of the D800 copy is top left.
You'll notice the Coolscan resolves a little bit more than the D800 even though there are more pixels from the D800.
For the big 100% crop to the right, I used my K20D+autobellows+Pentax M 50mm f4 macro to magnify the center area about 4.5X. You'll notice the detail that was not resolved by the methods above.

I originally did this to test my lenses - all of which I bought used, and I wasn't sure if they were good performers. I first tested them on my K20D and they seemed fine so I tested them further using Kodak Techpan. After these tests I feel good about these lenses although now I am not sure what limited the resolution of detail captured on the film - was it the film itself or the macro lens?

[fsge]

I've only compared my Coolscan 4000dpi scans of 35mm film to my K20D (15MP) and to a Nikon D800(36MP).
I started off with a frame of film with sufficient detail to distinguish what the scan can resolve as well as not resolve. For the film I used Kodak Techpan shot at ISO25 and developed in Kodak Techpan. To ensure suffient detail for reference I used an 12233 resolution chart arranged 4 high. I used my Pentax LX+Pentax M 50mm f4 macro under optimum settings - tripod, MLU, sufficient lighting and shutter speed and varied apertures. I then scanned/copied the various frames and this is the "best" from the lot although there were actually a few that were equally as good.


Full res -> Kodak Techpan scan compare

The full shot is shown in the bottom left.
The 100% crop of the center area of the K20D copy is above it.
The 100% crop of the center area of the Coolscan 4000dpi scan is above that.
The 100% crop of the center area of the D800 copy is top left.
You'll notice the Coolscan resolves a little bit more than the D800 even though there are more pixels from the D800.
For the big 100% crop to the right, I used my K20D+autobellows+Pentax M 50mm f4 macro to magnify the center area about 4.5X. You'll notice the detail that was not resolved by the methods above.

I originally did this to test my lenses - all of which I bought used, and I wasn't sure if they were good performers. I first tested them on my K20D and they seemed fine so I tested them further using Kodak Techpan. After these tests I feel good about these lenses although now I am not sure what limited the resolution of detail captured on the film - was it the film itself or the macro lens?

All this work to test your 2nd hand lenses, wow!

[LesDMess]

All this work to test your 2nd hand lenses, wow!

They were suspiciously cheap so I had to know that they would be good enough to use . . .