Setting up a repro stand

[rdeloe]

There's a thorough evaluation of the Linos Inspec. x L 5.6/105 Line Scan Lens at Robert O'Toole's site.
https://www.closeuphotography.com/inspec-x-l-lens/2020/6/12/inspec-x-l-56105-line-scan-lens-test

Robert's site is an excellent and comprehensive resource for lenses for closeup photography.

 

[JeffK]

I noticed the plane of focus from foreground to rear wasn’t even like left to right with the ALPA configuration - weight was to far out. I’ve just been experimenting today. For my main purpose of my 4x5 one off shots - as Paul said, good enough.

Amazing feedback from everyone here. Good learnings for the community. Thank you!!!

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Thanks for the link - I called actually Rodenstock in Munich to discuss the differences and they said that inspec lenses aren't quality controlled in all axes as for machine vision lenses this is not so important whereas the photographic lenses have to pass an additional quality test - ie there are certain inspec lens specimens which would not be sold to photographers. Whether this is important practically I don't know, but it was enough for me to abstain from the Linos variant.

I think it will be perfectly fine with either one of them; the Linos one is quite a bit cheaper.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I noticed the plane of focus from foreground to rear wasn’t even like left to right with the ALPA configuration - weight was to far out. I’ve just been experimenting today. For my main purpose of my 4x5 one off shots - as Paul said, good enough.

Amazing feedback from everyone here. Good learnings for the community. Thank you!!!

You need a laser align system and a geared head like the Cube metric for best results and a sturdier repro stand, possibly. The point is you can get great results with repro, but the reason Flextight X5's are so expensive still is because it is just perfect results every time and the old high end flatbeds are super slow but require no manual intervention.

If your use case is casual scanning and you already have a digi back then a repro setup is a very good alternative at the price of being finicky and fiddly; doing a perfect 8x10 hex stitch is error prone and takes a lot of time ... to get right. Also get a 99 CRI light source to get truest colours.

 

[Alkibiades]

There's a thorough evaluation of the Linos Inspec. x L 5.6/105 Line Scan Lens at Robert O'Toole's site.
https://www.closeuphotography.com/inspec-x-l-lens/2020/6/12/inspec-x-l-56105-line-scan-lens-test

Robert's site is an excellent and comprehensive resource for lenses for closeup photography.

very interesting comparision: the SK componon-S 100 mm seems to be the king of sharpness ( non MC lens!) - I got my in aperture mout for little more that 100 euro. Nobody would believe me when how sharp the lens is...

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Looks like the Linos doesn't have the floating lens adjustment ring of the photographic 105 (maybe I don't see it correctly). You can set the floating lens group at an optimum position within the total lens system to achieve maximum resolution at any magnification. If shot at 5.6, with the right floating lens setting, with a total parallel plane of focus, the sharpness is absolutely startling. So a very good solution for one-shot 35mm, for example.

The Rodenstock guy highly recommend to use the non-linos version for best results for negative scanning.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I just saw that the inspec tested here is not the very latest one. This is the one recommended for photographic use in the Linos catalogue. Again, the difference being vs. the photographic version sold by Rodenstock, that quality control is apparently tighter. I can only take the word of the Rodenstock designer, but he said they check the alignment of all lens element with the photographic version in all corners, whereas with the machine vision lenses it is done only for one axis.

I have never seen any trace of CA with that new design. It is truly apochromatic at the highest magnification.

Qioptiq Q-Shop | inspec.x float 5.6/105 und 5.6/120 | Online kaufen!

inspec.x float 5.6/105 und 5.6/120 -

www.qioptiq-shop.com

 

[JeffK]

You need a laser align system and a geared head like the Cube metric for best results and a sturdier repro stand, possibly. The point is you can get great results with repro, but the reason Flextight X5's are so expensive still is because it is just perfect results every time and the old high end flatbeds are super slow but require no manual intervention.

If your use case is casual scanning and you already have a digi back then a repro setup is a very good alternative at the price of being finicky and fiddly; doing a perfect 8x10 hex stitch is error prone and takes a lot of time ... to get right. Also get a 99 CRI light source to get truest colours.

Exactly my purpose, casual scanning and to also use to do some artsy macro work.

There's definitely a niche market out there. Which is why cultural heritage systems are $100K plus to setup. For my use it was using the the digiback and XF I already have to digitize the negs I've already shot - up to 4x5.

This thread has been amazing. @Paul Spinnler do you think I should rename to "Setting up a repro stand"?

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Yes I think it is a better title

 

[rdeloe]

Exactly my purpose, casual scanning and to also use to do some artsy macro work.

There's definitely a niche market out there. Which is why cultural heritage systems are $100K plus to setup. For my use it was using the the digiback and XF I already have to digitize the negs I've already shot - up to 4x5.

This thread has been amazing. @Paul Spinnler do you think I should rename to "Setting up a repro stand"?

If you're renaming it to "Setting up a repro stand", then hopefully I won't be spoiling your fun by throwing out a link to Jim Kasson's elaborate horizontal scanning setup.

Picture of the setup here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65819824
Thread about performance here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4649837

 

[rdeloe]

very interesting comparision: the SK componon-S 100 mm seems to be the king of sharpness ( non MC lens!) - I got my in aperture mout for little more that 100 euro. Nobody would believe me when how sharp the lens is...

It's one I haven't tried because I'm very happy with my APO Componon 90/4.5, but it does perform very well in Robert's testing.

 

[sunhouwang]

@Paul Spinnler, Have you ever considered the Coastal Optics 60mm f4 lens, it's also a macro lens in full spectrum.
It can cover the 3344 sensor, though made for full frame.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

No I have not, I just use the 105 on an IQ4 150.

 

[TechTalk]

There's a thorough evaluation of the Linos Inspec. x L 5.6/105 Line Scan Lens at Robert O'Toole's site.
https://www.closeuphotography.com/inspec-x-l-lens/2020/6/12/inspec-x-l-56105-line-scan-lens-test

Robert's site is an excellent and comprehensive resource for lenses for closeup photography.

Thanks for the link. I've browsed this site in the past and enjoyed the content. Now, I have it bookmarked for future reference.

There are so many interesting possibilities!

 

[MGrayson]

I like his using old silicon wafers as a resolution target. Modern ones would need hard X-rays..

 

[rdeloe]

As a bonus to the great information at the site, Robert is a genuinely nice guy who likes engaging about that stuff. He seems to have a good relationship with what's left of Schneider-Kreuznach. My APO Componon 90/4.5 has a type code that is not documented in any of Schneider's available technical data sheets. Robert tracked down a Schneider VP who dug through the archives and came up with an answer as to which variant it was.

 

[SCHWARZZEIT]

The 105 also exists from Linos, but the quality control is not the same for non photographic lenses. I would get it from Alpa with the matching black / gold Novoflex bellows. Only negative is that you cannot use it with flash, meaning you'd need an Alpa FPS to do flash based flower photography or so. FPS is out of production, I think, so what Alkibiades suggested, ie a vintage macro with Copal, might be the cheapest path if you can accept to not have the best of the best with the bonus that flash photography is also possible.

For flash photography with the 105 you can mount a Copal #3 shutter on the lens’ front filter thread with a simple adapter.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

For flash photography with the 105 you can mount a Copal #3 shutter on the lens’ front filter thread with a simple adapter.

That’s nifty, thanks!

 

[SCHWARZZEIT]

For one shot it is a good setup though - especially with the Rodenstock 105 and say 35mm. You can use the negative supply carriers for this.

Have you used NS carriers with your setup? If so, have you had any issues with film flatness with these carriers when filling the frame of your 150 MP back?

-Dominique

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I use the digital transitions ANR glass in 8x10 as I primarily have 8x10; I got the 4x5 carrier from DT and for medium format I use the NS carrier with built in forwarding mechanism. I think for 4x5 and up it is best to use the DT stuff.