Lenses to photograph negatives?

Hi,
I have inherited about 10,000 black and white 35mm negatives of photos taken in the 1930s and 1940s. I want to develop them but can not afford to. Recently I bought a Canon 300d digital camera. Is there a lens or a combination of lenses that I can buy to photograph the negatives, so that I can at least see them on screen before selecting some to print?
I have read the thread describing the use of flatbed and negative scanners, but I want to try this route first, if possible.
Thank you.
Dave in Cork, Ireland.

Canon 100mm macro would be good, maybe 50mm macro would work, too. But as you light negatives from behind and in any case need LOTS of light, extension tubes would be the most sensible low cost solution.

Although a flatbed or negative scanner would be your best bet, if you don't have one already, then the other alternative would be to get a light viewer like this one (http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …&O=productlist&​sku=194987) and then use a macro lens that gives you a 1:1 magnification to shoot the frames of the negative. Canon 100mm macro and the Sigma 50mm macro lenses will give you the 1:1 magnification you'll need. I'm sure there are other macro lenses that will work just as well.

To keep the negs flat on the light viewer, you can place a pane of glass from a picture frame.

DIgitizing 10,000 negatives just to view them is a sizeable + painful task using a slide scanner and even more painful to do by camera/lens. Even if you can process one every minute, that will take a whole 24/7 week of work - just to view the images. I suggest you try to get access to a light table and a good lens/loupe and check the ones of interest visually and only digitize those. A simple light table can be a clean window on a bright sunny day - maybe not so likely in Cork at this time of the year?

I have digitized large numbers of negatives using both DSLR and slide scanners. I think the scanning method is considerably easier and far less tiring because you don't have to continuously fiddle around with the negatives as much. Also because you can scan directly into a program like PS you can also perform some automated image processing as you go. And - if the negs are really good quality it might be possible to get more than 8Mp out of them!

Help me with the math here.
The OP said he wants to use a 300D.
How can you shoot a 35mm negative at 1:1 magnification with a 1.6 crop factor camera and get the whole negative in the image?

If you don't already have a macro lens, it'll probably be cheaper to buy a flatbed scanner that has a place for negatives and slides that costs about $100. You won't get a macro lens for that price.

You'll also get horrible image quality for that price. Flatbeds suck for film scanning.

There are special lenses for this.

To get consistency, I'd light the negative from behind with a flash... not on light table. The neg would be placed in a modified slide mount, or something similar. Take a macro lens, position the camera to include the slide and leave the AF on. Also backlight the negative so that the AF has something to grab onto.

You'll get 6-8 mp results like this quite fast. The problem is dust and spots on the negative. This will effectively wear out your shutter mechanism, since rebels for example are rated at 10K actuations. So that's somewhat expensive.

Another way is the dedicated slide scanner, like a noink Coolscan or minolta. They go for about 300-600 bucks new and the quality is going to be better. It will also remove the dust for you with a clever mechanism.

If I were you, I'd get a scanner... because you'll probably shorten the life of the shutter significantly in your camera which will cost you around 200 bucks to replace. Add 300 bucks and you have a high quality scanner and you saved your shutter.

Unless your camera is on warranty...

go to your local community college. Most have negative scanners these days in their photo department. I use ours frequently.

Just saw a auto feed dedicated film scanner at computergeeks.com for about 120 bucks. http://www.geeks.com …asp?invtid=F180​00&cat=SCN

The auto feed option might help speed things up....

Vince

I have a Minolta Dimage Dual II 35 mm Negative scanner. Works wonders.

UnDo wrote:
Just saw a auto feed dedicated film scanner at computergeeks.com for about 120 bucks. http://www.geeks.com …asp?invtid=F180​00&cat=SCN

The auto feed option might help speed things up....

Vince

Im kinda wary about that, since most of the good ones cost a thousand or more.


I might be a good choice though if you are just archiving the negatives, and are not critical about the quality (although I am sure the quality will be more than adequete.

You could probably buy a decent film scanner for less than a macro lens, proper lighting, and equipment for a decent way to hold the negatives.

I agree with Curtis that you don't even want to think about a flatbed scanner for scanning negatives. There are two reasons. First, the resolution of flatbed scanners is much lower than what you really want. Second, the scanner and software (drivers) makes positive images out of both black & white as well as color negatives. That's not easy to do with a flatbed scanner.

I have a Canon FS4000US which cost about $800 new. I suspect you can find them used for significantly less.

I don't know what the current market has to offer, but it's worth a look.

Just move the camera back a little farther away, that'll all. As a matter of fact, if you really move back far enough you can even make the negative disappear from the viewfinder.

I would invest in a good film scanner. Copy them and then resale the scanner. A good scanner will hold its value

Has anyone given thought to the size of these negatives. I have hundreds of inherited negatives and they are multiple size from back then.

Best ideal was to loupe them and do the best ones.

John V