Valoi Easy 35

[roughcutter]

Has anyone had experience with this system https://www.valoi.co/easy35
The obvious selling point is a much speedier (and direct way) of scanning slides/films over conventional methods. I currently use a Plustec 8200i scanner, which is a great piece of kit but painfully slow, and having about forty years worth of slides to get through is a daunting prospect.
I know that a macro lens is an essential requirement before proceeding, and the system isn't cheap either (£300+ ?). Is it worth the punt?

[Archer]

Experience with this? No, but it doesn't look all that different from the various slide copy attachments that have been sold over the years. Here is a Nikon option that is actually a lot cheaper (although it does not have a built-in lightbox): https://www.nikon.co.uk/en_GB/product/a ... 2-VWD304AW

If you do a search on various auction sites and such for 'slide copier' you will no doubt find other versions. If there is no built-in light, get a color correct LED lightbox for viewing slides and use that. You could even use a lightbox and a tripod to mount your camera with suitable lens in such a way that you only have to make sure to position the slide the same way every time. You can use a bit of cardboard and tape to help you with that.

They are much easier and quicker to use than your Plustek scanner but the question is whether you will get the same quality. If you use the infrared channel on your scanner, that is something that you won't have with this kit. The software that comes with your scanner is better at dealing with tricky colour casts and different negative/positive films.

If you want to know if it will be worth the money, I would do a search for a second-hand slide copier kit and try that first, although you said you needed to get the lens too. That would make it a significant investment anyway (you can also get a 2nd hand lens of course).

I have scanned many years worth of slides and negatives and yes, it is a daunting task. I used a Plustek 7400 at first before upgrading to the 8300i. Having good quality scans of all of those images is worth something though.

[daggerfan]

Have you checked out the JJC FDA-S1 copying set? Seems much the same thing for less than a third of the price, and the adaptors fit most commonly-used macro lenses.

I've no idea how good it is, but at 70-90 quid I'm toying with the idea of trying this as an alternative to my tripod-mounted camera and lightbox set-up, which can be time-consuming to set up and then put away.

[roughcutter]

Thanks for the feedback guys, that's very useful info there. Cheers ML

[roughcutter]

Have you checked out the JJC FDA-S1 copying set? Seems much the same thing for less than a third of the price, and the adaptors fit most commonly-used macro lenses.

I've no idea how good it is, but at 70-90 quid I'm toying with the idea of trying this as an alternative to my tripod-mounted camera and lightbox set-up, which can be time-consuming to set up and then put away.

I've recently taken the plunge and purchased the JJC FDA-S1 kit (along with recommended Canon EF 100mm f2.8 USM Macro). I must say it certainly is a very promising combination. Approaching it by trial & error for now, it's been an interesting learning curve so far. I'm using a Canon 1D mk.4, with the image quality set to 'small JPEG', AV mode set at f2.8 full aperture & 200 ISO. The kit itself is very well made with quality metal components and is simple to assemble. I found it easier to operate this set up from a tripod. Remarkably quick to work, I managed to shoot 300 slides this afternoon, the resulting images look really good on the camera viewing screen. I have yet to download these images (proof of the pudding), early days admittedly, but presently feeling quite confident about the results.

[roughcutter]

Using 'Small JPEG' setting yielded a disappointing result, the image had an immovable colour cast and was somewhat diluted. So I then opted for the opposite extreme setting 'RAW' (for a slide scan you may wonder?), I also dropped the ISO to 100. Resul!
_61G8139 by Mark Lewis, on Flickr
_61G8138 by Mark Lewis, on Flickr
I then used the Canon software RAW editing, which gave me a much wider scope for tweaking the images. Then converted/saved & and downsized them to 1600 x 800 JPEGs. Well chuffed with the finish, definitely the way to go for me from now on.

[Archer]

Result! Looking forward to seeing more slides from your collection!

One little tip: have a look at the levels on that Phantom shot. The glare on the fuselage is completely blown out to pure white. Setting the highlight level correctly (you may need to shoot the slide so that, initially, it's a bit darker) might get that blown out area reduced a bit.

[roughcutter]

Admittedly I was a little enthusiastic & hasty when I edited the Phantom shot, I but see where you're coming from. Having said that, the slide was actually under exposed somewhat, but certainly any constructive critique is very welcome, cheers. I'm quite pleased with the 100mm Macro lens as well, never had one of these before, an affordable none IS model which I purchased 'used' from MPB. It's a delight to use and another interesting avenue for me to explore.

[Archer]

I understand, if the slide was a bit underexposed to begin with it is easy to end up with something like this. I am not familiar with the Canon RAW editing software but looking at that image in Photoshop gets me this:

The peak at the extreme right end are those clipped blotches of white. Your RAW converter should have a similar option. Setting those high and low level stops just beyond where the information 'ends' and adjusting the overall brightness with the middle slider is my usual method of tweaking. I'm sure you know that already. It can get challenging on images that start out with a strange exposure value of course.