Analog Review: Lomography Digitaliza +/Max

[@salembiad2]

Hi Jonathan. I hope you’re well! I just wanted to say I really enjoy your videos and hope you post again.

[@fotografieschumacher]

I just bought the +version of the set, which comes without the phone stand because I scan with a DSLR and Negative Lab Pro. Before that I used the older DigitaLiza and it's always been a bit fiddly and time consuming. So the possibility to pull a whole roll of 35mm through in one sitting came in quite handy. However, I was admittedly slightly disappointed on learning that the 120 opening only allowed for 6x7 negatives to be scanned. I got a RZ67 for which this works just fine, but I also have a GW690 for which it is completely useless. Bugs me, because I was hoping for a "one for all" solution in my scanning sessions...

[@cdaugherty7023]

I have 35mm negatives & slides. Also, I have inherited a lot of 127 negatives that I would like to get scanned/digitized. Would you recommend the DigitaLiza or not? I would be using a Nikon D750 with copy stand. What other options are available that would outperform the DigitaLiza? I'm starting to wonder how hard a DIY project would be at this point. Any input would be appreciated.

[@fotografieschumacher]

@@cdaugherty7023 For any format 35mm up to 6x7 it works like a charm. Just doesn't work at all for 6x8 an above. As 127 is in-between 4x4 and 4x6, it should also work alright.

[@FrankFiene]

Biggest problem, it is only good for 35mm. Middle format is not working well, and 6x9 which fits perfect a DSLM scanning with a 2x3 camera with one shot, does not work at all.

[@methical__]

Besides 6x9 what is the problem with MF?

[@FrankFiene]

@@methical__ You cannot use the wheel to forward the film, the film is bended and you have to change the frame after every shot. The normal Ditigaliza is better for this, you have two or three frames and just have to move the whole thing.

[@JoeyShip]

This is pretty great for teens who just want to have fun. It’s obviously not professional equipment. It has its place in the photography realm, just nearer the bottom tier. Also, this could be great in a couple years when phone cameras inevitably get much, much better.

[@JonathanNotley]

Honestly it just needs a macro lens that clips onto the existing iPhone camera. It's the minimum focus distance that causes all the problems, not the sensor itself.

[@maxencelemoine4190]

this systeme looks good but i'm a little bit concerned about the magnets on the 120 negative, especially if you do 6x9 or bigger, did you noticed damages on your negs ?

[@devlincook5741]

Hi Jonathan, loved your review! I’d like to use the 35mm holder with my mirrorless setup. However I’d prefer to use a better light source. Do you think it would work by just placing it over a different light? I’d worry that the masks would slide around without the supplied light. Thanks

[@zabtej1645]

why no 6x9? why no detachable 120 portion, with a roller action advancer? it's beyond me

[@russjump6194]

the problem that I have had is how the film rides in the transport the film is not flat and I get out of focus edges so the 35 mm part of this is actually worthless for me only thing that I can use on it is the lightbox and I use my enlarger film holders because they hold the film flat very disappointed for the price that I paid for it

[@erictouati3755]

Hi Jonathan, thank you a lot for this product review. I have 2 questions : 1. may I know what is your copy Stand for DSLR , i'm strugling to find one for a decent price in Europe? 2. I'm using the initial Digitaliza 35mm I still have issues with some curved film . do you reckon this Digitalza + is better?

[@TimoVarakas]

I know a lot of people recommend using a macro lens for scanning negatives, but if you have camera like the R5 or a X-H2 with a high resolution, could you use a lens that's sharp in f/5.6 and just crop in?

[@GreenlifeFin]

Great review, thanks. How close can you set the phone to the negative? My OnePlus phone says the supermacro distance should be 3-4 cm. Though the phone also can shoot RAW (not in supermacro), would that be a better idea?

[@hackerockmedia]

What camera stand are you using for holding that Canon R5? Where can I find it? I seems easier to setup than an inverted tripod.... Thanks

[@Shurkan2]

Does anybody know the CRI score of the light panel?

[@woodypigeon]

I was wondering that. Perhaps a flat field image of the panel could be used to correct wonky CRI?

[@Havenotats]

Hey Jonothan, I was wondering if you had any thoughts on the light source itself. I'm considering getting this kit for 120 scanning but since you cannot change the light source would you recommend it (compared to negative supply 95/99 cri light)?

[@cinziatoscano4486]

I'm having the same question, I would like to know more about the quality of light source

[@cdaugherty7023]

I have 35mm negatives & slides. Also, I have inherited a lot of 127 negatives that I would like to get scanned/digitized. Would you recommend the DigitaLiza or not? I would be using a Nikon D750 with copy stand. What other options are available that would outperform the DigitaLiza? I'm starting to wonder how hard a DIY project would be at this point. Any input would be appreciated.

[@israelreza1518]

Is there a light source that you recommend buying with the right amount of brightness for best results?

[@cborel83]

how do you think this would work with the pro max since it has macro mode?

[@JonathanNotley]

Probably not that well because the macro lenses use the 0.5x camera. Unfortunately you need a digital camera for proper results. If you have the means just abrogate all scanning responsibility to your nearest lab.

[@AaronYeoman]

Could I ask what copy stand you use?

[@AdamMcNutt]

Why would you use something like this or your larger camera setup and not a proper scanner itself that has IR dust removal and such?

[@JonathanNotley]

The main advantage is speed and detail. I'll probably never scan with my phone again but I'll definitely do more camera scanning.

[@AdamMcNutt]

@@JonathanNotley Do you get more detail out of using the camera than a flatbed scanner? I ask as I own a Canon 9000F Mk II and don't see as many people flatbed scanning as I do camera scanning anymore. Do you put more prep time into dust removal and cleaning of the negative without the IR dust removal provided by a flatbed or do you fix it in post?

[@JonathanNotley]

Camera scanning gets more detail out because of the ability to focus. Flatbeds almost always have problems with poor focus and subpar optics (I think the screen cezannes are the one exception). Dust removal is the main drawback but if it's a clean freshly developed negative this usually takes

[@devroombagchus7460]

If this thing is supposed to make life easier, don’t include my life.

[@thecameratherapychannel]

Does it flatten the film negative? (35mm)

[@JonathanNotley]

Yes, surprisingly effectively for the price.

[@jayryco]

Where did you purchase your mirrorless stand? The one your Canon R5 is mounted onto. Your stand looks of impeccable quality and I would want to purchase that exact one. Could you perhaps link it?

[@Superbustr]

I somehow feel that digitising film photos with a phone camera is in bad taste toward the medium of analog photography. -But I assume this is catered towards hipsters and people who want to get into analog photography at the lowest price point... skipping lab developing which will be the biggest cost.

[@gui4j]

blarblar blar .... now dark room print those images !!

[@JonathanNotley]

The vast majority of images shot on film end up in a digital workflow, wether that’s for printing or sharing online. This has been the case since ~2014 and all discussion on the merits of darkroom printing are essentially moot due to costs and access.