I swore I'd never use a mirrorless body for film scanning

I've been using a flatbed scanner for years, an Epson V600, and thought mirrorless cameras were just for people who wanted fake sharpness. Then I borrowed a friend's Sony A7R II and tried it with my Nikon 55mm micro lens, and the detail on a Kodak Portra 400 negative blew me away in like 5 minutes. Has anyone else had that moment where you realize you've been overcomplicating your scanning setup for no reason?

3 comments

3 Comments

sean8549d ago

I read a post on a photo forum a few weeks back where someone tested a V800 against a Sony A7R III with a Sigma 105mm macro and the difference was so big they sold their scanner the same week. That stuck with me because I have the V600 too and always thought flatbeds were the gold standard for home scanning. Your experience with the A7R II matches what that guy said about shadow detail and color accuracy on Portra specifically. It makes me wonder if the lens matters more than the camera body in this whole setup.

blakestone9d ago

Man, that V800 vs A7R III comparison hit me hard too. It really makes you wonder how much we've been missing with those flatbeds all along.

claire8729d ago

Got a buddy who spent three years fighting with a V700 trying to get clean scans of his medium format slides. He'd wet mount everything, spend an hour per frame tweaking height settings, still got Newton rings and dust spots. Last month he gave up and picked up a used Canon EOS R with the Canon 100mm macro and a cheap copy stand. First try with a Portra 400 negative he texted me a photo and said he saw grain he never knew existed on that film. He just laughed and told me he wasted so much time on a flatbed when the answer was way simpler.