Film Scanner advice wanted

terence · 06-02-2005

Hi,

I'm toying with the idea of getting a dedicated film scanner. I've been using Epson RX500 all-in-one to scan negatives with pretty good results.

What kind of improvement should I get if I go for a film scanner? Which model/make should I go for?

peter_n · 06-02-2005

I think quite a few people here use Minoltas, Nikon is also popular. There are so many models... Can you be a bit more specific: 35mm only? MF? Both or more? Are you scanning to print or just web display?

bmattock · 06-02-2005

This question gets asked and answered a lot around here - you might want to look at some of the previous threads, using the 'search' tool.

However, not to belittle your question, it's a good one. Although we all have differing opinions on scanners here, I think we can all agree on a couple of axioms:

1) You get more if you pay more.
2) You can get a lot for a little if you shop carefully and consider your needs.

If you need to scan MF as well as 35mm, then you either have to go the expensive route with a dedicated MF scanner (Nikon or Konica Minolta are all that are left here, I think); the ultra-expensive drum scanner route (commercial stuff), or a flat-bed scanner with neg-scanning capabilities (Epson, Canon, HP and others all offer models that do this).

I have an older Epson PHOTO Perfection 2400 with an optional transparency adapter (6x9 and 4x5) that I use for MF and LF negs. Works a treat, I'm very happy with it. There are much better ones out there now, and they don't cost the world.

For 35mm, you can go with Nikon, Konica-Minolta and a few others and get a dedicated film scanner. For the most part, I think we tend to agree that Nikon and KM are the ones to beat - the others are much cheaper, but tend to be not as nice (no offense intended). You can spend a little for something like the KM Scan Dual IV (which I have) or go up a bit for the Nikon CoolScans. Again, you tend to get what you pay for - spend more, get more.

I'd stay away from some of the lower-end brands like Pacific Digital, but otherwise, it is kind of hard to go too far wrong - just consider your budget and what level of output you'd like to achieve.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

PS - As to 'level of improvement' that you should get - I don't know the model you mentioned, so I don't know how it's output looks. I do know that my KM Scan Dual IV gives me TIF files that can be of much higher quality than my new digital SLR camera at 6.1 megapixel (of course, this also depends on my skills, my lens, and my ability to clean up dust and scratches in the negs, etc). I could blow up my best digital SLR photos to maybe 11x14. I feel confident that I could go poster-sized with my very best 35mm slides scanned at 3200 dpi. That tell you anything?

cp_ste.croix · 06-02-2005

which are the dedicated scanners that can do both mf and 35? maybe i've missed it, but i haven't read anything about them..

chris

titrisol · 06-02-2005

Yep there are, Nikon9000 and some others, but their price goes well above $1500
While a 35mm scanner will be in the $500 price range
The Minolta DualScan IV is a great buy, and it's selling for less than $300 now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cp_ste-croix

which are the dedicated scanners that can do both mf and 35? maybe i've missed it, but i haven't read anything about them..

chris

phototone · 06-02-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by cp_ste-croix

which are the dedicated scanners that can do both mf and 35? maybe i've missed it, but i haven't read anything about them..

chris

For dedicated film scanners (not flatbed) The Nikon 5000ed, the Minolta has a model for 35mm and 120, and the Microtek Artixscan 120tf (previously known as the Poloarid Sprintscan 120). These are all slightly under $2000. Then there are the Imacon models, which start at $4000+ and go up. These can also do 4x5.

peter_n · 06-02-2005

I think the Nikon 8000ED (?) and the Minolta Multi Pro do both 35mm and MF.

I have the same dedicated 35mm scanner as Bill, the Minolta Scan Dual IV and it is a great liitle scanner for posting to the web. My scans of B&W negs at 3200dpi are 85MB. The scanner cost $250 from B&H in NYC.

berci · 06-02-2005

With some fiddling you can even scan XPan negs/slides with the Minolta.
Good buy.

RubenBlaedel · 06-02-2005

I needed a scanner that could do both 35 mm and MF film with good d-max and high resolutin optical - I ended up with a microtek ArtixScan 120 tf - also known as a polaroid something scanner. It is noisy and slow but it scans 4000 dpi with 4,2 dmax meaning that it has to be a very very dark slide before it gives in! I have seen them used for less than 1800 USD and the can do scans that compares with an imcon 8 times as expensive.

terence · 06-03-2005

Thanks very much for all your helpful replies.

Just to be bit more specific: I'll be using the scanner to scan 35mm negatives mostly (maybe I'll experiment with slide films soon). No MF planned as I don't have a MF camera.

I've read a few threads here about the KM software being not so good for negatives. Does it mean that I'll have to fork out to buy third party software? How about the Nikon software? Any good?

Thanks again!

peter_n · 06-03-2005

Terence I use the standard KM software. I'm a scanning newbie and to be honest, I'm not particularly interested in becoming a scanning expert. Just my own laziness.

I find the KM software to be completely adequate for my needs, which are web display, not printing. I use Fuji Neopan film and my gallery has lots of pics using Acros 100 & Neopan 400 & 1600 with the regular Minolta software. Once again they are not great, highlights are blown here or there but they are OK for display.

I think forum member Todd.Hanz also uses the standard KM software with a SD IV. His scans are really quite excellent - you should check out his gallery too.

cp_ste.croix · 06-07-2005

So maybe a flatbed for 6x6 and a dedicated Minolta would do the trick? I'm thinking of selling prints and enlarging for gallery shows up to about 11x17 or so. Having not shot 6x6 before I'm not sure how big a % of my work will end up in that format and I do have a few colour slides that need scanning. I know that these scanner threads go on ad naseum but i really don't want to invest a bunch of money only to regret a purchase...

if you were in my position, what would you do?

XAos · 06-07-2005

A side note on MF - if like me (and I suppose I'm not alone) your only MF camera is a Holga, and you dont shoot it a lot - just get a flatbed for scanning odd stuff. You'll spend a lot more than the cost of the 35mm scanner you want and a flat bed trying to get a multiformat film scanner suitable for the Hassy crowd.

cp_ste.croix · 06-07-2005

my MF is a Rolleicord III, maybe i'll wait until i get some film through it to see the quality of the negs and whether they are really worthy of thousands of dollars worth of scanning.

T_om · 06-07-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by cp_ste-croix

my MF is a Rolleicord III, maybe i'll wait until i get some film through it to see the quality of the negs and whether they are really worthy of thousands of dollars worth of scanning.

Well, I don't know about "thousands".

I just put a fellow forum member onto a used Nikon LS 9000 selling for $1200.00. That is a very good price. It is true that it is over a thousand dollars, but it is not into "thousands". I don't know if he bought it, but the deals are out there.

Used Nikon LS 8000 (the earlier model, same scan capabilities) scanners like my own are available for even less if you look around for a bit. These are very capable machines producing professional quality output.

If you want new only, then yes, prices start going up considerably.

Tom

cp_ste.croix · 06-07-2005

i'm not adverse to used, in fact it's the only way i'll be able to afford it...please excuse my hyperbole, it's the result of a weak Canadian dollar and excessive student loans

i will continue to save and search...