Exactly the set up I use. Brilliant. The camera doesn't even need to be held steady when you take the image. You don't have to worry about getting the film plain and the sensor plain parallel to each other. It's cheaper and more accurate than other systems. Genius.
@thephotographytoolkit
5 ай бұрын
I know right!? It is such a fantastic and easy set up. I have been digitizing my parents old Kodachrome slides that are 60+ years old and they look amazing!
@napbaer
5 ай бұрын
i did not know that the Nikon d850 could do that, now all i need is the ES-2, a macro lens and some film to digitalize
@thephotographytoolkit
5 ай бұрын
🤣 Your comment made me lol Alex. Yeah - if you don't have film to digitize, this may not be the set up for you. 🤣 And just for reference, the other Nikon camera that will do this is the D780.
@lowfatedes
3 ай бұрын
Same, plus a D850
@thephotographytoolkit
3 ай бұрын
@@lowfatedes The D850 is probably my favourite DSLR. Absolutely fantastic. If you can find one with a low shutter count used at a decent price, I would highly recommend picking one up.
@abhijit-sarkar
Ай бұрын
I believe the biggest issue with the ES-2 is that live view only works for JPEG output. If you're outputting JPEG, any film lab can do it for a tenth of the hassle.
@thephotographytoolkit
Ай бұрын
The ES-2 doesn't limit me to jpeg - the D850 does that when reproducing negatives. When outputting slides (positives), I can capture them in RAW. A couple of other things: I have had mixed results from film labs when they develop and scan my film. I have old negatives and slides that I would like to digitize and its much more expensive for a lab to digitize older stuff. Thanks for the comment.
@orrin-manning
5 ай бұрын
I respect film shooters, but is it really worth it if you’re just going to go through all this trouble with a digital camera at the end of the day anyway? What is the appeal of a digitized film photo over an ordinary digital photo?
@thephotographytoolkit
5 ай бұрын
Thanks for the question. I am not digitizing the images just for the sake of having them in a digital format. I have a purpose. When I am capturing images on film, it is different than when I am capturing images on a digital camera. I am much more selective and I put a lot of thought into the images that I capture. Also, some of the cameras I have don't even have a light meter so I have to use an external light meter and manually focus. I really feel connected to the process of capturing images. I love the challenge of capturing images on film. If I want to share those images on KZitem or IG or on a blog or any other digital format, I need to digitize them. In addition that that, if I want to print the photos (either on a home printer or from an external print shop), I can make sure the digital file looks the way I want it to look. Many print shops aren't used to printing for negatives these days. And at the end of the day, it really isn't a lot of trouble. I think that is part of the appeal of the ES-2 kit. It is really easy.
@abhijit-sarkar
Ай бұрын
I have started shooting film since the COVID, and for me, the excitement lies in the technical challenges. You don't have the instant feedback on the back of your camera, histogram, and stuff, so, you the photographer, are forced to make conscious choices that have real implications on the image. The level of skill needed to get a good image is just higher. Last but not the least, most, if not all, of the best images in the last century were made on film, and I love the old school look of color film. Check out photographers like Ernst Haas and Saul Leiter, what they did with early film is astonishing.
@ericrinehardt9373
6 күн бұрын
I shoot digital and film. When looking at my image library, the film pics almost always stand out as more aesthetically pleasing, and I've never been able to replicate the look of film with digital. The film "look" is not something that can be explained, as it's more to do with depth of tone than the optical perfection we try to chase with digital. Plus, the entire process of working with film is something many of us enjoy. Film is also very easy to digitally edit, as the color and tone is usually (ideally) spot on assuming correct exposure and scanning. The only advantage of digital is that it's more convenient--for most people that is the deciding factor. For me, I work with film wherever I can and reach for digital when necessary. Many digital-only shooters dismiss film shooters as contrarians or hipsters (I'm not suggesting this is how you feel--it's just a general observation), but there is genuine value to film both in the look and the experience.
@gabis1963
2 ай бұрын
Which light panel did you use and settings (5500K)?
@thephotographytoolkit
2 ай бұрын
I used an older light panel but it is something like this one: tinyurl.com/hskpanel When it comes to the settings on the D850 to digitize images, I just set the camera to the digitize negatives option and it takes care of the white balance and I don't have to do anything- I can't even change the settings.
@allancamarillo
Ай бұрын
Great! Will this work with Canon cameras like R6 II?
@thephotographytoolkit
Ай бұрын
You would need to use a different third party adapter instead of the ES-2 like the JJC converter (www.amazon.com/JJC-Digitizing-Converting-Digitizer-Converter/dp/B09SLQJM7Z?th=1). If you are digitizing negatives there is more work to do afterwards to convert them into positives in post production. So it is possible but more difficult with other cameras.
@Marko-od7eb
5 ай бұрын
Question, Do I got to have macro lens because of focusing distance or will this work on any other lens ?
@thephotographytoolkit
5 ай бұрын
Yes - that is correct. But it can't just be any macro lens. I have the 105mm macro and it won't work with the ES-2 because it has a longer minimum working distance. The AF-S 60mm macro that I use or even the older D version of the 60mm macro will work.
Пікірлер: 18