The Objective

We are frequently asked to recommend the best film digitization solutions. The only credible way to answer these questions is through direct testing and real-world validation. At Capture Integration, we believe expertise is earned through personal hands-on work, away from our desks and into the studio. This important company philosophy allows us to guide our client recommendations with honest personal experience compared to shallow industry marketing or hearsay. This is a cornerstone of our company and our beliefs.

The goal of this project was to determine the highest possible film digitization quality at the lowest practical cost. While commercial systems exceeding $80,000 exist, they are inaccessible to many users. Conversely, lower-cost mirrorless solutions lack the resolution required for demanding formats such as 4×5 film. This test was designed to objectively evaluate a middle ground: maximum image quality without unnecessary expense.

Why Fujifilm GFX?

Achieving the highest quality at a reasonable cost requires a modern 100‑megapixel sensor. Although the Phase One 150MP platform offers exceptional results, its price places it outside the scope of this evaluation.

Full‑frame mirrorless systems from Nikon, Canon, and Sony are limited to 45–60MP, offering roughly half the resolution of available medium-format options at a similar cost. As a result, these systems were also excluded.

This narrowed the field to the Fujifilm GFX 100S II, the most affordable 100MP system currently available. It is approximately $1,800 less expensive than its competitor, the Hasselblad X2D 100C. In addition, Fujifilm continues to offer a current-production GF 120mm Macro lens, whereas Hasselblad has discontinued all XCD macro lenses, as yet with no news of a replacement. Combined with our industry standard Capture One tethering support, these factors made the GFX 100S II the sole platform used in this test.

Tethering with Capture One

Tethering is essential for high-quality film digitization. Capture One remains our preferred solution due to its stability, workflow efficiency, and focus on professional imaging.

On February 25, Capture One released a Negative Film Workflow (Beta) that introduces a dedicated Negative Conversion tool and a new SCAN tool tab. This significantly reduces setup time by eliminating the need to manually build negative curves.

Additional advantages include:

• Advanced color control, noise reduction, & processing algorithms
• Live View for precise critical focus
• Saveable negative curves for repeatable workflows
• AI Crop for faster production
• Batch conversion of entire rolls
• Per-image chromatic aberration correction

Optics Selection

You have read it in my blogs before and I feel the need to repeat the age old adage of, “you are only as good as your glass.”  This is an old photographic mantra, but it is more important today than it ever has been, and something I live by.  

The pixel size and well depths of modern sensors are getting minutely smaller every day.  When compared side by side, many modern lenses shockingly fail.  In fact, many mirrorless systems, have not expanded to larger sensor resolutions due to the fact that their lenses just can’t resolve past that pixel size. YES, this is the primary reason they have not released a higher resolution sensor!   Thus, while I did not change sensors in this test, I absolutely made the decision to chose the best lenses that Fujifilm and the photographic market offer in this genre. 

Personally, I never shot larger film than 4×5.  Therefore, my goal was to find a one lens capture system for 35mm, 2 1/4, and 4×5 film at the highest possible resolution. There was only one choice in the Fujifilm line up, the GF 120mm R LM OIS WR Macro Lens.  This lens is a .5x magnification, so it does not approach 1/1.  In order to achieve 1/1 capture ratio, the MCEX-45G extension tube needs to be used.  These are both off the shelf products and are easy to use.

I chose  the Linos inspec.x 105mm Vis NIR lens as the comparison option.  The unique aspect of this lens is that you can order it specifically for your different magnification needs.   It shipped in a floating element version last year but was substantially more complicated and was more expensive to build.  Now it is less than half the cost and I completely prefer its ease of use. 

For this evaluation, I chose the 0.76× configuration  as is the most versatile option across all film sizes.

Working Distance Considerations

The minimum focusing distance of the GF 120mm Macro (10.75 inches) limits magnification when digitizing 35mm film. Testing confirmed that extension tubes were required to fill the GFX sensor.

The superior performance of the Linos lens is largely attributable to its optical design and reduced working distance, which was fully leveraged using the Cambo RPS Reproduction Camera with bellows and rail movements. This setup maximizes precision and minimizes compromises inherent in conventional macro configurations.

Test Methodology

To ensure consistency and repeatability, all captures followed the same protocol:

• Aperture –  We captured all images at f/8.  We find that diffraction becomes a real issue in the last 3 f-stops of any modern high resolution capture system. Do the test and you will find your best aperture with your body lens combination.
• Settings – Image stabilization is turned off.  And we are utilizing the electronic shutter only.   Both of these settings help us to achieve less vibration and other anomalies for the highest capture quality.
• Film Holder – It is incredibly important to reduce as much light on the edge of the negative as possible.  Flare is your enemy in film digitization.  We used the Cambo RPS 500 film stage to mask all extraneous light and keep flare to an absolute minimum.  The RPS film holders also do a great job of keeping the negative as flat as possible by holding the edges with built in tensioners. 

• Sturdy and calibrated camera support – A calibrated and vibration free copy stand is essential as the backbone in any reproduction system.  The Cambo Table Top RPS supported the full film digitization system used for this test.
• Resolution Chart – It isn’t easy to compare resolving power of different lenses when using film.  It’s important to have a higher quality known target that is repeatable from one test to the next.  We used the USAF 1951 Glass Slide Resolution Chart.  This chart allows us to measure up to 600 line pairs per mm in any optics system.

Image Results

The following image compares the Fuji  GF 120mm Macro by itself, combined with the MCEX-18, and finally combined with the MCEX-45.  Each combination was captured at the closest working distance for maximum resolving power.  Importantly, the USAF 1951 target is just slightly smaller than a 35mm negative, so the size provides a good approximation of a 35mm film scan but with a target we can analyze results and compare resolution much more succinctly.

And this is exactly why we conduct the test.  Simple math tells us that we should use a MCEX-45 extension tube to digitize 35mm negs.  Yet, this combination performs poorly in this macro test.  Please note, that we used 2 separate 120mm Lenses, for this test.  We shot this scenario over and over again, reducing flare, vibration, changing aperture, and changing variables to achieve these results.  The results you see are the culmination of 48 hours of testing on just the MCEX-45 combo to understand its limitations. 

It is clear, that the 120mm Macro/MCEX-18 combination yielded the highest resolving power in a 35mm film digitization scenario of Fuji GF products.   The results with this combination met my expectations, and left alone, would produce a satisfying result.  But then I switched to the Linos inspect 105mm and again was surprised by the results. 

Conclusions

Even compared to the highest achievable resolution from the Fujifilm GF 120mm lens, the Linos inspec.x 105mm lens objectively surpasses the 120mm in resolving power. If we wanted to quantify the results, the USAF 1951 chart allows us to choose which grouping where we can determine clear definition of each 3 lines.  By doing such we can see that the Linos lens resolves to group 6, element 6 whereas the GF 120mm macro only gets us to group 5, element 6.   This equates to double the resolving power in line pairs per mm.

In addition to illustrating some of the challenges faced in the film digitization process, the test solidifies the importance of the optics in our full digital system. While we found that the GFX 100S II provided an affordable platform for this task with the impressive 100mp sensor. The GF 120mm Macro lens paired with the MCEX 18 extension tube gave us very good results. However, when the GFX 100S II was paired with the Linos inspec.x 105mm, the full system excelled beyond all others.

If you have questions about the methodology, equipment, or results, we welcome further discussion. Please drop us a line.

“New knowledge is the most valuable commodity on earth. The more truth we have to work with, the richer we become.” – Kurt Vonnegut

dave@captureintegration.com

770.846.5223

More Cultural Heritage Blogs

• 
  Film Scan Digitization Lens Test with the Fujifilm GFX 100S IIMarch 6, 2026
• 
  FADGI 4 Cultural Heritage 100mp Digital Capture ShootoutJuly 29, 2025
• 
  Best practices for utilizing Lens Cast Correction (LCC) in Capture OneJune 17, 2025

Cambo Repro Linos inspec.x L 105mm

BUY NOW

Cambo Fujifilm Repro Bellows Camera

BUY NOW

Fujifilm GFX100S II Camera

BUY NOW

Fujifilm GF 120mm Macro Lens

BUY NOW

Fujifilm MCEX-45G Tube

BUY NOW

Fujifilm MCEX-18G Tube

BUY NOW