Many users cropped cameras often complain that it’s difficult to get a good picture from such a camera and that you must use full frame. Many people just drool on full-frame camerasthinking that they can do something improve their photos. And if you really want to shoot a full frame, and at the same time invest a little bag of money to purchase a camera, then this article is just for you.
Shot on the same Full Frame :) 28 MP for 240 cu The cat is photographed in the sunset red sun.
Any good photography is based on the desire and skill of the photographer, everything else (including photographic equipment) is just a distraction from the main goal. I am often reproached for advocating to shoot with cheap equipment. I don’t actually do that, I advocate the idea that you can get a good shot from any camera if you want. Of course, the better the technique, the easier and faster the result can be achieved. Those who want to get good pictures get them from anyone, sometimes even the cheapest technique.
Actually, in this photo almost the whole essence of the article :)
Therefore, if there is a key aspect - desire, then for only 240 cu can:
Shoot with a full-frame SLR camera, with fast automatic focus, good serial shooting with a huge frame buffer, a huge optical viewfinder, nice controls and at the same time take pictures at 28 MP.
Example photo on my set. Sunset.
The secret is very simple - just use a film camera.
Many readers may think that the film camera is something terribly ancient, incomprehensible to manage, morally obsolete and unsuitable for use in the era of modern monsters Nikon D4 and Canon 1DX. In the expanses of the CIS countries such an impression people have it from the fact that in the Union and on its territory not a single SLR narrow-camera camera with automatic focus was released. Seriously, the old Zeniths do not cause any interest among young people, the main reason for which is the complete obsolescence of technology.
Example photo on my set. Gull
But in other countries long ago let out pretty autofocus analog volatile DSLRs with interchangeable lenses. Moreover, using such a SLR camera is no different from any modern amateur DSLR camera. Nikon D3200 or Canon 600D.
Example photo on my set. Forest Blackberry
I conducted an experiment, which cost me quite inexpensively, as a result of which this kit was assembled here:
- Nikon AF N8008s (also known as Nikon AF F801s) - 400 UAH
- Cosina MC 19-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 (AF) - 700 UAH
- AA Batteries * 4 - 20 UAH
- 200-frame Fujifilm Superia 36 film roller - 27 UAH with free development
- Epson Perfection V330 Photo Scanner - 650 UAH
- Shipping of the camera, lens and scanner - 80 UAH
Total 1877 UAH or 235 cu In fact, I could save on the lens and batteries, since I have both. The camera, film roll and scanner cost me some 140 cu
Example photo on my set. Among the stones
As a result, I got:
- A full-frame camera with a shooting speed of 3.3 frames per second. Some amateur cameras have approximately the same shooting speed. Nikon D80, D70s, D3000, D3100, and some professional CZK for 500 cu they shoot even slower, for example, Fujifilm Finepix S5 Pro.
An example of a photo on a film camera. Beach.
- Maximum frame buffer makes 36 shots, for example, Nikon D7100 with the highest quality has frame buffer only 6 shots (RAW, 14-bit, lossless compression).
An example of a photo on a film camera. After sunset
- My camera can work out super short shutter speed equal to 1/8000 seconds, which even can not Nikon D600 и Canon 6D.
Example photo on my set. Among the stones
- A huge optical viewfinder that never dreamed Canon 70D for 1500 cu Yes, and in itself Nikon AF N8008s very good and durable camera.
An example of a photo on a film camera. House overgrown with grapes.
- My Nikon AF N8008s it works easily with manual optics - it correctly measures exposure, has an electronic range finder, which very accurately tells about focusing. Even Nikon D5200 for 600 cu can't measure exposure with AI-S lenses.
An example of a photo on a film camera. Sitting on the rocks.
- Very nice LCD in JVI, its brightness is physically (not electronically) dependent on the light source. The brighter the source - the brighter the LCD, which allows you to always clearly see the camera settings in JVI. For example, on many CZKs, I don’t see the LCD at all on a bright day or when shooting in backlight.
Example photo on my set. Photo from the boat
- Camera control is almost the same as that of any other Nikon CZK. When shooting, you don’t feel any difference, the whole setup is on a monochrome display.
An example of a photo on a film camera. Gull
- Lens Cosina MC AF 19-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 I just bought it for fun. 19mm at full frame can be safely attributed to an ultra-wide range of focal lengths. The lens focuses terribly fast, and with it you can create amazing pictures. To get the same viewing angle as this cheap lens gives out, on Nikon cropped cameras you should use the expensive Nikon 12-24mm F / 4.0.
Example photo on a film camera
- A scanner in the house is also useful, for example, to digitize old photographs for an album. For example, you can scan your school diaries, and share old memories on social networks. In any case, the scanner will not be redundant.
Example photo on my set. Yachts
- The scanner allows you to obtain images with 48-bit color depth. This means that each channel is encoded with 16 bits. Most 'cool modern cameras'can encode a channel using only 14 bits, and receive 42 bits at the output. Theoretically, with my scanner, you can get 64 times more shades than with any DCC.
An example of a photo on a film camera. Shore
- Of course, my set has more disadvantages than advantages :), but I’ll keep silent about them in this article.
Example photo on my set. Temple in Chersonesos.
The following describes where I got 28 MP from the old film camera.
Of course, the 28MP figure in the article is a duck. But you can still get this figure in this way - the film has a physical frame size of 24mm * 36mm. Let's find the area of the film in square inches, since the parameters of the scanner are indicated in inches.
1 centimeter = 0.393700787 inches
1 square centimeter = 0.15500031000062 frame inches
1 square centimeter = 100 square millimeters
1 square millimeter = 0.0015500031000062 cpi
As a result, the film area is24mm * 36mm * 0.0015500031000062 = 1,339202678405357 sq. inch
Example photo on my set. Landscape
The area of the film is 1,339202678405357 sq. inches. My scanner scans at 4800 pixels per inch, or 23 pixels per square inch. From 040 square inches of 000 pixels per square inch, 1,339202678405357 23 040 pixels are obtained, which is approximately equal to 000MP.
Example photo on my set. Balaclava
If your scanner has a different DPI, then the number of pixels when scanning a film frame can be calculated using the following simple formula:
DPI * DPI * 1,34
Some scanners in specifications have different DPI in height and width, for example, 4800 * 9600 is indicated in the specifications of my scanner. In fact, I can only scan at 4800 * 4800 or 9600 * 9600. The last option is half interpolation. The 'maximum possible DPI' is often indicated, for example 128000 is simply bloating the final image using a mathematical method of interpolating pixels, these numbers should not be paid attention to.
Example photo on my set. Near the shore
The simplest scanners with a slide adapter have 1200dpi, as a result, such a scanner can be squeezed out of one film shot:
1200 * 1200 * 1,34 = 1 929 600 (total about 2 MP)
I indicated '28MP camera' in the title of the article, since my Epson Perfection V330 Photo cuts off the edges of the frame a little when scanning and we end up with images not from the entire area of the film, but from a slightly smaller area. For example, a scanner often creates images like 6639 * 4319 pixels. Those who are chasing megapixels have already realized that from such a simple set you can squeeze these (or not these?) megapixels almost as much as Nikon D800 (a D800 costs almost 3000 cu).
Example photo on my set. Another sunset
By itself, for serious work, such a set is no good. But the task before me was quite amateurish. For 240 cu I can enjoy a full-frame camera with convenient professional-grade control, an ultra-wide-angle lens that helped me out well on vacation and in addition I have a scanner that is convenient for scanning mail invoices :). I do not advocate fussing with a film camera, but once again I want to emphasize that there is absolutely no difficulty in working with a good analog camera. And instead of being discouraged that someone full frame, you can easily and simply shoot a full frame yourself.
Example photo on my set. Road.
More sample photos (1400 pixels long)
Conclusions:
All of the above applies not only to my set. I brought my film set as real worldly example. Now buy used Nikon or Canon's autofocus analog camera is easy, the same goes for good-old lenses. The same story with the scanner.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
Thank you very much for the article, I read it with pleasure and support the author in the idea of a full frame, in which even fifty dollars is fifty dollars and shirik is not “castrated”, as in a cropped frame.
A sound scanner isn’t for the current? Is there an old HP in me, whose scanner is an MFP?
Yurii Unfortunately - it will not work (it will be below the average level ...) I do not remember now the site that tested the leader HP Scan JET 4050 - its actual resolution is below 1300 dpi, for films it is much lower than the average level. Since about 2000, the standard of the middle level is a resolution in the region of 4000 dpi, an acceptable resolution is considered to be from 2400 to 3200. The upper level is from 4800 and drum scanners up to 12000-16000 ...
For all those interested in the quality of scanning - you need to look at the actual tests of this device (marketing numbers often exceed the capabilities ....) http://www.filmscanner.info/en/FilmscannerTestberichte.html
Google translator will translate almost instantly (even from Chinese ...), if you select the checkbox - determine the language .... http://www.filmscanner.info/en/Aufloesung.html
At the end of the table is a column of tests and revisions. http://technoclopedia-canon-eos.com/index.htm?/frames/slide_stuff_scanners.htm
HP Photosmart (SCSI only ...) and HP Photosmart S20 may work (true resolution around 2400dpi ...), it all depends on your print size ...
http://skanworld.ru/skaner-slajdov-chto-eto-i-zachem-eto.html
To judge the reality of this multipixelism, you also need to attach files without resizing, since the pictures in the article 720 pixels wide mean nothing
Hello Arkady.
I've been reading your essays for a long time ... Great.
But here I am on what question. I have a Nikon N8008 camera.
Got it just yesterday. Well, in the evening I played and played (So I was overwhelmed with feelings) that without understanding, I turned on AUTO MODE by simultaneously pressing the MODE + DRIVE buttons. 15 page instructions. After my awkward manipulations, the camera no longer works. That is, it works but not like that. Does not remove, does not allow to select other modes A, S, M. Does not give out ISO. Only blinks the screen in which PD. Dual program
The lens was 50 1.8D. When I put the aperture ring at 22, the screen with the shutter speed and aperture readings blinks. For other values of FEE ...
Dear Arkady, tell me how to return everything back (before I pressed these magic buttons everything worked). Essay about 8008S and they seem the same.
Help me please. I have long wanted to film, and this is where my dream ended. So I did not remove a single film.
Sincerely, Piskunov Igor.
I look forward to hearing.
Try to remove the batteries, this will reset the settings.
Filmed. Does not help. There is an idea that these are batteries (problematic acm). In the evening I'll see ... There are other acb.
About the possibility of printing from large scans ... .. http://www.morrobaygiclee.com/BountyBW_07191992.jpg
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?69992-Leafscan-45-Sprintscan-45-Artixscan-2500-hi-res-quot-desktop-quot-scanner-recommendations/page2
A very interesting topic by Shapoval and cleverly written. For a couple of years I also played on the topic of scanner and film. Arkady's photo is immediately given the film, by color and grain. By the way, the latter is not treated. Somehow I decided to prove to myself that digital is better, especially in terms of resolution. I made a film frame from a LOMO-135 camera on a Fuji 100 film. It was a still life of objects that had stickers, fonts of different sizes, etc. Scanned RAV-chik 4800dpi. Then I looked at the frame on the film through a microscope. As a result, giant grains made it difficult to read the fine print. The scan was the same resolution as the image on the film. Then I decided to look at the projection of the image in the camera, that is, the lens. Through the lens of a microscope, of course. It turned out that the lens "sees" much more, and almost all the smallest fonts are readable. For example, at a distance of 2,5 m through the industrial-73 2,8 / 38mm lens, a font of 0,5mm was read !!! No film camera can reproduce such a font on paper or a scanner. Sorry for not measuring in pairs / lin per mm. I think the font readability method is more accurate. To consolidate my experience, I made an interesting contraption. This is a 3-megapixel mobile phone matrix (somewhere 3,5 * 2,5 mm). In short, the density is very high. I attached an M 42mm mount to screw in different test objectives. And took a shot. As a result, there were a lot of details in the picture of the figure, even the structure of the paper. If I am not mistaken, the density of the matrix was 34 Mp / cm2. That is, the matrix squeezed the maximum out of the image. I had a Fujifilm s9500 compact. So he took pictures very similar to film, in resolution and colors. 9MP just matches the prints of film frames from budget cameras. Also grain and noise in the photo 20 * 30cm. Digital cameras from 8 megapixels and cropped matrices are already seriously superior to full-frame film cameras in noise (there is noise on a film at ISO 100, but at a digital there is a minimum). 12 megapixels already surpass the frame of the 24 * 36 film in noise and resolution. And this is not only my opinion. Thanks to Radozhiva! Very adequate tests of lenses and cameras!
It's my pleasure. Thank you for the interesting addition.
T a r and k What he photographed, but for the sake of completeness, I would like to know: What was the film, how it was processed, what scanner and mode was scanned ... - (all this significantly affects the result ...). With a professional approach from 35mm film, A3 + (33 by 48 cm) is printed quite for itself - only printing not on an amateur LABE ... About the matrix of a mobile phone, clean copy (In general, a plot from the category, well t b ...).
The film was Reala100. He showed it in an ordinary lab personally, as he was a photo operator. The temperature of the solution was reduced, this should have reduced the graininess. Chemistry Kodak. I'm glad it's funny for someone to read about my tests, because I only dabbled in it. I do not want to offend film development fans or collectors prof. films, but there are also disadvantages. Especially technical. I shot on film for a long time, but gave up this business when the first cysfrolabs appeared on the market. The demand for photography and digitization has grown. At such speeds, quality was out of the question. I'm talking about new chemistry that worked at high temperatures and printers that worked with stripped-down jpegs. The result is soap in the photo. There was no greenery in the photo, like the portraits. That's where I dropped the tape. But when new labs, scanners appeared, the possibilities of the film returned. Then I took up not 24 * 36mm, but 60 * 60mm. Waters and it sucked me. I mean that the film is superb, but there is also a return on investment, opportunities. I am moved by photos from negatives, but if they are made on analog labs or printers. I do not protect digital photos 100%, as I have not seen normal photos superior to film. I found a compromise for myself, I shot with Fuji S2Pro and S3Pro. I remembered the phrase of one person - “if they come up with a 24X36cm matrix, I will never return to film services”. Of course, my tests are funny, for an amateur, but real. Here is an interesting link http://vmirefoto.blogspot.ca/2013/07/fuji-fujifilm-s2-pro.html. It is interesting to see a scanned shot of a 24X36 frame without noise or crystals at 100% crop. I have nothing against the film grain, but it is especially beautiful on prints from 18X24cm photographic plates, but not 35mm. In support of the topic and the film I’ll say experiment, but this is a technical technique. The success of the shot is the love of the shot !.
I fully support, if you want (and skill) on the film, you can get quite decent shots. Sam for about a year shot on the Nikon F75 28-100, and used it for tasks more complicated than the photo on a sunny day. But still, the inability to see and evaluate the result on the spot is a minus, but certainly not for amateur photography in good conditions)
Nikon D1x, Fuji-fujifilm-s3pro work fine with me, many films of different formats and several scanners from СanoScan 4000US to Polaroid Sprintscan 45 ... It is scanning that allows you to work well with negative and slide - (dust and scratches {ICE4}, support for high-bit processing, effective grain reduction {“GEM” mode}, restoration of the color of old negatives {“ROC” mode}, automatic work with contrast and DDE tones and all this in combination with almost unlimited possibilities of the photo shopper ... films - I especially recommend my favorite scanner Nikon CoolScan 5000 ED ...
My son, at Frontera, worked on a photojournalist for many years (it seems DOTSENKO) - so he has panoramas stitched from 50 and more 35mm negatives or slides, scanned on an editorial Nikon CoolScan 9000 ED (just a bomb ...) The grain is also reduced by a special program with multiple (up to sixteen ...) scanning in one pass by subtracting the chaotic registration of grains ...
One of the 35mm works of DOTSENKO (panorama - meter by six) for one of the offices of the Council of Ministers of Ukraine ... To the question: “Why from the film, and not from its top figure ...”, he answered; “My very best Nikon brands are not able to capture the entire light range of a panorama - from the sun with rays to deep shadows ...”.
Yes, indeed, we have not yet studied the properties of the film. This is certainly cool, but at the professional level. Maybe you should buy scanners, and Kiev-60 is still lying around like new. If, guys, who develop 60 mm film in the city, I advise you to try it. Once I hired a girl photographer to take a photo of landscape design for a company. Of course for printing in a catalog and in a magazine for advertising. I shot a 6x9cm frame in Moscow. She said it would be very high quality. We took a photo - the colors are nowhere more real !! But the resolution is very small. And the landscape needs sharpness, so that every leaf and blade of grass would ring! Well, I took my Kiev-60 with MC Wave 2,8 / 80. And the result was amazing! I recommend this glass even for 4/3 ″ matrices. True, I pasted in the back a ring with an inner diameter of about 20mm (for 4/3 ″) made of frosted plastic from parasitic illumination. Still a medium format player. The blackening of this glass is at the highest level and makes this lens quite contrasting. Sorry, not in the subject, but 120 film can raise even an amateur to the highest level and there will no longer be 28 megapixels! :)))
See why Muscova did not work (the last group of lenses ...) For a long time I have been using Mamiya instead (both 6x9 and 6x7) - The resolution just keeps on ...
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html
Shot from 35 meters Mamiya 7 and lower crop http://forum.xitek.com/forum-viewthread-tid-152799-extra–action-printable-page-7.html
Yes, impressive! And the color of the greens is very sweet. And mommy 7 is just pretty. That's what I agree with, this is the dynamic range of the film. I didn’t understand before why the clouds and the shadows of the detail are traced on the negative. And on the photo paper is a cookie. Here you flueg understand how to do HDR with films, che three times scanned? Or you still need 3 or 5 frames. Now I’m kicking why the film is respected for its photographic breadth!
For stationary subjects, briquetting can be both, for moving subjects only multi-exposure scanning (although this is pseudo HDR ...) Ideally, more information is obtained from more exposures ... On the latest digital Hasselblads - four or six to choose from.
The most important thing is to be able to multi-exposure scanning in one pass (only on semi-pro and pro level scanners ...) Households with several passes can blur and even duplicate defects when removing dust and scratches ...