How I Digitized Slides with the Leica M9

Ever since I found my way to digitizing positive (slide) film with the Fujifilm S5 Pro, I have been been obsessed with the prospect of using the Leica M9 for that task. I mean, if the 6 megapixel cropped frame CCD sensor of the Fuji S5 can produce such remarkable results, imagine what the 18 megapixel full frame CCD sensor of the Leica M9 could do. Unfortunately, the Leica M9 is a digital rangefinder without live view. That means it cannot focus through-the-lens. Moreover, Leica does not make an M-mount macro lens with 1:1 magnification.

Not one to accept defeat, I have been trying to find a way to digitize slide film for over half a year. Naturally, my first attempt to do that mirrored my current Nikon ES-2 methodology (by using the Nikon Z6 or Fujifilm S5 Pro). That said, I still needed to find a way to focus accurately and replicate a true 1:1 macro magnification without a 1:1 macro lens. At a lost for a solution, I consulted my Leica Pocket Handbook, Eighth Edition, where I chanced upon the Visoflex system, developed by Leica for through-the-lens viewing with M-mount lenses.

For my needs, I decided on the Visoflex III and a 4x 90° Magnification Viewfinder to resolve my focusing issue. With regards to the pesky issue of producing a true 1:1 macro magnification, I decided on the 16469 extension ring, being the recommended attachment for macro photography at the 50mm focal length (according to the Leica Pocket Handbook). As to my reason to select the 50mm focal length, I wanted to capture the slides with the Leica APO 50mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH. I thought it would be the best performing lens for the task.

Fujifilm Provia 400X (Expired 2014) @ 50mm Focal Length - Leica M9

Fuji S5

Nikon Z6

In case you are wondering how the Visoflex III and 16469 extension ring can accomplish macro photography, it’s a mathematical relationship. From my understanding, producing a true 1:1 macro magnification requires:

an extension between the lens mount of the lens and camera equal to the focal length of the lens in millimeters. In the case of a 50mm lens, the extension must be 50mm.
the focus ring of the lens to be set to infinity.
the actual focus to be visually confirmed by the shooting distance between the slide and the lens, since the focusing ring of the lens (already set to infinity) cannot be shifted.

With the math seemingly sound, it should have been smooth sailing. However, I experienced some technical difficulties. You see, the extension tube of the Nikon ES-2, paired to the 52mm diameter attachment, did not have sufficient length to focus at infinity, when using the APO 50 with a 39-52mm step-up ring. That said, the extension tube did have sufficient length when paired to the 62mm diameter attachment. However, I only had a 46-62mm step-up ring as an alternate. As such, I had to switch to the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH.

On top of that, the 4x 90° Magnification Viewfinder covered my hot shoe. That meant I couldn’t fit my Bolt VM-210 macro flash onto the Leica M9. As such, I did not have sufficient artificial light on demand and had to wait for a sunny day to digitize my slides. Of course, I could have resolved the problem by switching to a vertically oriented viewfinder. However, there was an even bigger complication. The shooting distance of the Nikon ES-2 was too difficult to fine tune for focus, given that its extension tube was too rigid to slide precisely.

Fuji S5

Nikon Z6

At this point, you are probably wondering why I spent so much time and effort adapting the Nikon ES-2 for the Leica M9? I mean, I did not have to be so insistent. I could have just as easily stuck the slides to a window on a sunny day or placed it loosely on a light table. That said, I still needed a method that enabled me the prospect of trouble-free batch processing. Without the film holder of the Nikon ES-2, framing multiple slides for precise capture would be overly tedious, with regards to leveling the camera and positioning the slides uniformly.

On top of that, I needed to find a method in which the shooting distance could effortlessly be set. Intrinsically, sliding the extension tube of the Nikon ES-2 to set the precise shooting distance was much too inconsistent a process. Thus in search for a solution, I chanced upon the Leica BEOON film copy stand, developed by Leica for duplicating film capture. As a complete set, it comes with a 1:1 extension ring (designed specifically for any 50mm M-mount lens) and a 1:1 film frame mask for 35mm format, along with a 5x finder to check for focus.

For the most part, the Leica BEOON satisfied most of my requirements. Setting the correct shooting distance was a snap with a knob. Positioning the film uniformly with the mask for duplication was child’s play. That said, there was this one complication. With the Leica BEOON, you could not set the shooting distance and capture the slide in one seamless motion. In other words, you had to shoot blindly, swapping between the finder (used to check for focus) and the camera used for duplicating slides in order to accurately capture each frame.

Fuji S5

Nikon Z6

That complication decidedly made the prospect of batch processing unappealing. Basically, I had to remove the finder after confirming focus in order to remount the camera back onto the copy stand for each and every slide I duplicate. But, then a thought occurred to me. The focus distance doesn’t change between slides. All I had to do was make sure I didn’t shift the shooting distance on the film copy stand. With the issue of shooting blindly sorted out, the next question to be addressed was the matter of adding sufficient lighting.

In the best of possible worlds, I would’ve had a light table. But since I did not have one, the next logical option was to conscript an iPad for service. Basically, I created a blank white photo and cranked the luminescence to full. Unfortunately, the resulting duplication was dotted with pixelation, which presumably were instances of LED filaments captured from the iPad. After that failed attempt, I opted for a simple Kaiser Slimlite Piano LED tablet, which did resolve the pixelation issue. That said, the resulting capture was consistently underexposed.

To duplicate the slides at smaller apertures, the LED tablet did not have sufficient light to capture at ISO 160 - being the native minimum ISO setting of the Leica M9. Of course, to compensate for the absence of sufficient artificial light, I could’ve decreased the shutter speed. However, I was unexpectedly encountering camera shake. As such, I had to set the camera to ISO 400. This resulted in noticeably noisier images. And even at ISO 400, I was still consistently one to two stops underexposed in capture.

Fujifilm Provia 400X (Expired 2014) @ 50mm Focal Length - Leica M9 - NOTE - From this point on, I thought I was shooting Fujifilm X-Tra 400, and was shooting the roll as such. For that reason, my metering was not as accurate, which is why the follow… — Fujifilm Provia 400X (Expired 2014) @ 50mm Focal Length - Leica M9 - NOTE - From this point on, I thought I was shooting Fujifilm X-Tra 400, and was shooting the roll as such. For that reason, my metering was not as accurate, which is why the following photos were not photographed as accurately as the preceding photos.
That said, there is a Part II to this review, where the “middle row” was shot in negative film… also digitized with the Leica M9

Fuji S5

Nikon Z6

With my setup sorted and my technique to shoot blindly figured out, I then went about the process of batch duplicating my slides. As long as I did not accidentally shift the shooting distance, I shouldn’t be experiencing any out-of-focus capture. Of course, after duplicating 74 frames, I was bound to encounter some deviation in focus. But for the most part, this process did seem to work. The Leica M9 could be used to digitize slides with the Leica BEOON with a simple light tablet. And, the results were really worth all the trouble.

Of course, whether you think it is worth the trouble really depends on your expectations. In my opinion, when the Leica M9 captures the slides perfectly, the outcome takes your breath away. The color balance is unreal in how naturally it renders. Even so, are the results that much better than those of the Fujifilm S5 Pro or Nikon Z6? On a blind comparison, I find the M9’s rendering to be visibly more appealing. Overall, the midtones are much richer, which accentuates the perception of volume without an over-weighting of shadows and highlights.

Still, I am on the fence. I can’t get over the fact that I cannot seamlessly check for focus and duplicate the slide in one motion. In reality, once you confirm focus and do not shift the focus accidentally, there really should not be any deviation in focus during a batch process. To be frank, the Leica BEOON digitization method does offer a fast workflow. Trusting it is a matter of careful undertaking and knowing how to confirm focus by positioning the film frame number in the center of the 1:1 mask for reference, with the lens wide open for easier viewing.

Fuji S5

Nikon Z6

One final note. Even though I was consistently off by one to two stops in the digitization process with the Leica M9, the dynamic range was surprisingly flexible. If I had to offer an explanation, I can only suspect that spot on metering at the moment of film documentation saved the day. That said, I should invest in a cable shutter release, and shoot at sub 1/8s shutter speed. That or get a brighter light tablet.

Main images digitized with the Leica M9 and Leica APO 50mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH with the Leica BEOON and Kaiser Slimlite LED tablet, at ISO 400 and f/5.6. Supplemental comparison images digitized as disclosed in the caption with a Fujifilm S5 Pro + Nikon AF-S Micro 40mm f/2.8G + Nikon ES-2 + Bolt VM 210 or Nikon Z6 + Nikon AF-S Micro 60mm f/2.8G + Nikon ES-2 + Bolt VM 210. Exposure has been tweaked for images digitized on the Leica M9. All images captured on Fujifilm Provia 400X (expired 2014) and developed at box speed.

Title image actually digitized with the Nikon Z6. I did experience some deviation in focus accuracy, since I did batch duplicate 74 frames of image. Admittedly, I could have re-shot the affected images, but that would have taken too much effort. Also worth noting, you should turn on the image preview on the Leica M9, in order to confirm the correct exposure. That way, you can tweak the exposure accordingly, depending on what you see in preview of each digitized frame.

Last - the Leica M9 I used had an earlier replacement sensor. It should be noted that the earlier version used a much thinner cover glass (by Schott) and didn’t fix the problem of corrosion. Sadly, the sensor on my Leica M9 is showing signs of corrosion. The current replacement sensors (by Schott) use a much thicker cover glass. That said, the thicker glass does appear to impact the sensor’s overall rendering. In other words, that beloved CCD rendering of the Leica M9 will suffer the same fate as Kodachrome.

Disclaimer

Sep 21 How I Digitized Slides with the Leica M9

Disclaimer

Sep 21 How I Digitized Slides with the Leica M9

Sep 29 Rangefinders are Awful - Featuring the Nikon F6 + Nikon AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G

Sep 16 Productivity vs Pleasure - Choosing Digital or Film as a Working Photographer

Related Posts