APO Corrected 1.35x Scanner Lens For $20 PrimeFilm 3650u

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Pau
Site Admin
Posts: 6053
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Valencia, Spain

Post by Pau »

About the X ray images, I suppose that older lead doped lenses could be more opaque than modern ones.
I like to see the X ray screen when my equipment is scanned at airport controls, not so much when I used to shot film.
Pau

typestar
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:45 am
Location: Austria

Screen Cézanne Scanner -- not a bargain :-)

Post by typestar »

As it was the best in the testing (sharpness, overall image quaility...):
If you have "some" money and look for a SCREEN Cezanne Elite Scanner, optical. res. = 5300 ppi -- and if you are interested in its lens inside...

here is one sitting - and: .... waiting ;-) https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Screen-Cezan ... 1796804928

and here was one: https://www.ebay.de/itm/Screen-Cezanne- ... 2549938294

Okay, new it was USD 34.000 in 1999 ... ;-)
http://www.genesis-equipment.com/upload ... ezanne.pdf

All the best,

Christian

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3417
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Screen Cézanne Scanner -- not a bargain :-)

Post by ray_parkhurst »

typestar wrote:As it was the best in the testing (sharpness, overall image quaility...):
If you have "some" money and look for a SCREEN Cezanne Elite Scanner, optical. res. = 5300 ppi -- and if you are interested in its lens inside...

here is one sitting - and: .... waiting ;-) https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Screen-Cezan ... 1796804928

and here was one: https://www.ebay.de/itm/Screen-Cezanne- ... 2549938294

Okay, new it was USD 34.000 in 1999 ... ;-)
http://www.genesis-equipment.com/upload ... ezanne.pdf

All the best,

Christian
I'm amazed I was able to pick up a couple of the LFOV lenses fairly cheaply, as that's probably the most valuable part of the Eversmart!

Is there any info at all on the Cezanne scanner lens, other than it can support 5300ppi?

viktor j nilsson
Posts: 423
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:43 am
Location: Lund, Sweden

Post by viktor j nilsson »

Recieved two vintage silicon wafers from eBay seller kaijusears the other day. The plan is to post some tests of my specimen of the Reflecta scanner lens eventually.

Btw, I bought the wafers in large parts thanks to mwayatt, who posted a positive review of kaijusears' wafers on eBay; they were so cheap that I hesitated at first.

Tentatively, my Reflecta scanner lens looks clean and sharp. The extension needed to get 1.35x is tiny, however. I can't quite compress my Pentacon bellows that much. I get something like 1.48x as a minimum. I would prefer to keep it on the bellows, so that I can mount it and my microscope objectives the same way on my stacking rig.

I think I mentioned that I've mounted the Reflecta scanner lens inside a 12mm RMS extender tube. This arrangement allows for some flexibility in how far forwards inside the tube that I place the lens. I can still move it a bit further back I think. But I've also been thinking of creative a "negative length" adapter, i.e. to place the lens at the rear end of a tube that extends backwards into the bellows. Need to do some tests to see how far down I would want to push it.

mawyatt
Posts: 2497
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater, Florida

Post by mawyatt »

viktor j nilsson wrote:Recieved two vintage silicon wafers from eBay seller kaijusears the other day. The plan is to post some tests of my specimen of the Reflecta scanner lens eventually.

Btw, I bought the wafers in large parts thanks to mwayatt, who posted a positive review of kaijusears' wafers on eBay; they were so cheap that I hesitated at first.

Tentatively, my Reflecta scanner lens looks clean and sharp. The extension needed to get 1.35x is tiny, however. I can't quite compress my Pentacon bellows that much. I get something like 1.48x as a minimum. I would prefer to keep it on the bellows, so that I can mount it and my microscope objectives the same way on my stacking rig.

I think I mentioned that I've mounted the Reflecta scanner lens inside a 12mm RMS extender tube. This arrangement allows for some flexibility in how far forwards inside the tube that I place the lens. I can still move it a bit further back I think. But I've also been thinking of creative a "negative length" adapter, i.e. to place the lens at the rear end of a tube that extends backwards into the bellows. Need to do some tests to see how far down I would want to push it.
viktor,

Glad you received good wafers, I had ordered a few from kaijusears and most were quite nice :D

I've recently severed a couple wafers (per Steve's challenge) with some success. :shock:

This was to have a smaller wafer sections to image (large 5 and 6" wafers can be difficult sometimes, not to mention 8" or 12"!!!) and repay Steve for the wafer sections he kindly sent.

I haven't been able to do any chip/wafer imaging lately because I'm tied up developing a precision stack and stitch system....which is nearing early beta evaluation mode.

Good luck and please show us your wafer images!!!

Best,
Research is like a treasure hunt, you don't know where to look or what you'll find!
~Mike

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

viktor j nilsson wrote:Recieved two vintage silicon wafers from eBay seller kaijusears the other day. The plan is to post some tests of my specimen of the Reflecta scanner lens eventually.

Btw, I bought the wafers in large parts thanks to mwayatt, who posted a positive review of kaijusears' wafers on eBay; they were so cheap that I hesitated at first.
Also had good experiences with eBay seller kaijusears.

Should have another shipment with some different units showing up here any day.

Another option to the bellows is to search Ebay for Thorlabs SM1 tubes. They are usually very cheap and they offer an adjustable tube with a lock ring. This would be more sturdy than a bellows and would be easy to work with outdoors.

Sometimes you can pick up SM1 tubes, adapter, iris for maybe $20?

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3417
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Lenses in Film- and legacy Highend-Scanners

Post by ray_parkhurst »

typestar wrote:
ray_parkhurst wrote: Sorry Christian, the LS-30 deal fell through. ...However .. an offer was accepted on another LS-30, so now I just need to wait. I will do a quick report on the physical aspects of the lens, but not sure I will be able to test it effectively if its FL is too short.
typestar wrote:Scitex S-2 and Scitex S-3 series or the Rodenstock Magnagon 75
an unbranded lens in the Japanese SCREEN Cezanne Highend-Scanner.
Are you sure of the "Magnagon" being used in the Scitex? I see some Rodagons on eBay being sold as Magnagons for some reason.
Dear Ray, great to see, that you want to report to us!
I received the LS-30 scanner today and can give a very brief report. I don't see any discernible difference between the LS-2000 and LS-30. the lenses appear to be identical, as do the CCD arrays. Scanner mechanics are such that the parts seem to be interchangeable.

Here are the numbers:

Lens Length = 33mm
Lens Diameter = 22mm
Aperture = 12mm
Sensor Length = 29mm
Sensor - Lens Extension = 60mm

So assuming 36mm film width, and total extension includes half the lens length:

mag = 0.81
FL = 39mm
Aperture = f3.3

More info when I attempt to test the lenses...Ray

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Lenses in Film- and legacy Highend-Scanners

Post by RobertOToole »

ray_parkhurst wrote:
I received the LS-30 scanner today and can give a very brief report. I don't see any discernible difference between the LS-2000 and LS-30. the lenses appear to be identical, as do the CCD arrays. Scanner mechanics are such that the parts seem to be interchangeable.

Here are the numbers:

Lens Length = 33mm
Lens Diameter = 22mm
Aperture = 12mm
Sensor Length = 29mm
Sensor - Lens Extension = 60mm

So assuming 36mm film width, and total extension includes half the lens length:

mag = 0.81
FL = 39mm
Aperture = f3.3

More info when I attempt to test the lenses...Ray
Excellent Ray. Thanks.

40mm, f3.3, not bad.

Robert

viktor j nilsson
Posts: 423
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 1:43 am
Location: Lund, Sweden

Post by viktor j nilsson »

Edit.

I initially posted some wafer shots I took with the Reflecta iScan 1800 lens, but honestly, they were so bad due to my incompetence that I felt I shouldn't waste anyone's time. Shooting wafers was harder than I thought. Robert's super-clean single shot images are quite impressive. I'll try again and post some real ones soon.

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

viktor j nilsson wrote:Edit.

I initially posted some wafer shots I took with the Reflecta iScan 1800 lens, but honestly, they were so bad due to my incompetence that I felt I shouldn't waste anyone's time. Shooting wafers was harder than I thought. Robert's super-clean single shot images are quite impressive. I'll try again and post some real ones soon.
Viktor don't get discouraged, my first few attempts were not very good either. One thing thats important is to clean the wafer. Also to keep it clean I keep something over the wafer when I am not shooting and when I am shooting there is a diffuser over it. I find that if I expose the disk for even a few minutes I will have to clean it again. Also its really important to set up the wafer flat or aligned with the sensor.

Keep practicing.

Best,

Robert

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3417
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: Lenses in Film- and legacy Highend-Scanners

Post by ray_parkhurst »

RobertOToole wrote:
ray_parkhurst wrote:
I received the LS-30 scanner today and can give a very brief report. I don't see any discernible difference between the LS-2000 and LS-30. the lenses appear to be identical, as do the CCD arrays. Scanner mechanics are such that the parts seem to be interchangeable.

Here are the numbers:

Lens Length = 33mm
Lens Diameter = 22mm
Aperture = 12mm
Sensor Length = 29mm
Sensor - Lens Extension = 60mm

So assuming 36mm film width, and total extension includes half the lens length:

mag = 0.81
FL = 39mm
Aperture = f3.3

More info when I attempt to test the lenses...Ray
Excellent Ray. Thanks.

40mm, f3.3, not bad.

Robert
The air cleared this morning from the smoke from Camp Fire, so I can start to think clearly again. It's surprising how lethargic and dopy it makes you when you're in a smoky environment. We bugged-out for a few days when it was at its worst, which was still better than the folks more inland were enduring.

My first test was the LS-2000/3000 scanner lens. A few notes on mounting the lens:

- tough lens to make work on DSLR with bellows. The lowest mag I could achieve was 1.43:1.
- another forum member 3D printed an adapter for me, but using it resulted in a minimum mag of ~2:1
- resorted to using a C-mount extension with smooth inside surface, which fit the lens snugly with a thin layer of tape
- mounted the extension facing inward, inside the bellows, to get a short enough extension to make it to 1.43:1

Performance notes:
- m=1.43:1
- WD ~45mm
- no visible CAs
- good sharpness
- good coverage on APS-C
- field is absolutely flat

Here is the mintmark of 1954-S RPM#4 Lincoln Cent. First shot is at center, second shot is at corner. Lighting is not the same since the light is fixed vs the lens. WD was too short to use my stitch lighting system, as I have not yet built a system to handle <50mm WD.

- images below are up-scaled to 200%

Center
Image

Corner
Image

Lou Jost
Posts: 5948
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Ray, why do you assume 36mm film length? Though we have seen a few exceptions, the Nikon scanner I have moves the film along its long axis, so the lens just needs to cover 24mm, not 36mm.

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3417
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

I was using the same assumption I made for the PrimeFilm scanners.

I just looked up the user manuals for the Nikon scanners, and it looks like they recommend turning the slides in portrait orientation for the LS-10 through LS-5000, and then LS-8000 and 9000 allow either orientation.

So this changes the calcs a bit...

m = 1.2
FL = 34mm
Ap = f2.8

So in my test at m=1.43, I'm fairly close to the working m =1.2. Also, for APS-C width of 22.2mm, I'm within the working width of 24mm. So the good performance under this condition is as expected.

Lou Jost
Posts: 5948
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

The LS800 and 9000 work for medium format, so it is understandable tha they are not fussy about the orientation of t35mm slides. But all Nikon scanners I know (and virtually all others) have a sensor that covers the short dimension of the film, and they scan along the long dimension. This makes good sense. The lens and sensor don't have to be so big, and the same mechanism can easily be adapted to draw uncut film strips into the scanner (Nikon higher-end scanners have an optional slider assembly for this.)

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3417
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

Lou Jost wrote:The LS800 and 9000 work for medium format, so it is understandable tha they are not fussy about the orientation of t35mm slides. But all Nikon scanners I know (and virtually all others) have a sensor that covers the short dimension of the film, and they scan along the long dimension. This makes good sense. The lens and sensor don't have to be so big, and the same mechanism can easily be adapted to draw uncut film strips into the scanner (Nikon higher-end scanners have an optional slider assembly for this.)
Ironically, the scanner which is the subject of this thread scans in "landscape" orientation, as does the 1800u and 1800i. I am not sure about the other PrimeFilm scanners.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic