[Clarkey]

Re; the softness - It may not be your lenses at all. I have also used a 4490 to scan, and had major issues with the holders not keeping the corners flat. The holder is also a fixed height and this used to frustrate my attempts to get a sharp image (even though prints made from negatives previously were razor sharp). Some emulsions scanned well and others did not (variations in thickness?). The point I am making is that the scanner did not always get the correct focus plane.

I did toy with getting a height adjustable holder from this guy, however he indicated back then that he was only doing 645 holders.

In the end a Minolta dimage elite II came up locally and I was able to buy it - It has been well and truly worth the money. I still use the 4490 for scanning 645 negatives though and it is pretty good.

[Eaglerapids]

Clarkey could very well be right about the scanner but I find the Tak 28/3.5 one of my more difficult lenses to achieve critical focus for whatever reason. I'm not knocking the lens, I love it, but I have to be extra careful with focus.

[drewdlephone]

Clarkey could very well be right about the scanner but I find the Tak 28/3.5 one of my more difficult lenses to achieve critical focus for whatever reason. I'm not knocking the lens, I love it, but I have to be extra careful with focus.

I have been finding it difficult to confirm focus with, which I take to be a byproduct of the increased field of view (and subsequently amount of detail) and that most of the "detailed" parts of the image appear further away, especially in landscape shots, with this lens. I would try popping the aperture up a few stops, but I'm concerned I'll lose whatever I would gain from that to aberration or diffraction.