best scanner for MF
Old 02-27-2007   #1
lmd91343
There's my Proctor-Silex!
 
lmd91343's Avatar
 
lmd91343 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 399
best scanner for MF

What is the best scanner for MF?

Epson 4490? HP 4890? or Canon 8600F?

I what a reasonable price scanner for 120.

Thanks
__________________
-Lance


Rangefinders used:
Canon IV Sb2; 7s x2; B&H 7; FED 2.f modified for Canon 0.95
Canonet QL17 GIII; Kodak Retina II; Moskva 5; Zeiss SI folder; Medalist II

Rangefinders lenses used:
Canon/Seranar 50/0.95; 50/1.8; 50/1.9; 85/2.0; 100/3.5; 135/4
FSU I50; J3
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2007   #2
xvvvz
Registered User
 
xvvvz is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 132
Forget the HP. Epson has better software controls. The Canon has more versatile film holders. True resolution will be about the same. Always a tradeoff!

Doug
---
www.BetterScanning.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2007   #3
ibcrewin
Ah looky looky
 
ibcrewin's Avatar
 
ibcrewin is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Age: 36
Posts: 753
I just got the 8600f for my birthday. I haven't really had a chance to play with it but so far so good. I mean it's nothing earth shattering or anything but is suits my needs. I don't have the means to easily make contact sheets so it makes it easy to proof my negatives.
__________________
Shooting, developing, and scanning more film in 2013! My Flickr Gallery


Bessa-R w/ J8 lens, Lubitel 2, Rebel XT, Elan 7e, Konica C35, Olympus Mju
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2007   #4
RObert Budding
Registered User
 
RObert Budding is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Arlington, Massachusetts
Posts: 1,200
Nikon Coolscan 9000.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2007   #5
lmd91343
There's my Proctor-Silex!
 
lmd91343's Avatar
 
lmd91343 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 399
I got the Epson 4490. It is the only one of the three that has true 16 bit B&W. My MF (6x9 and 4.5x9) scan with greater sharpness and much more shadow detail than my old scanner!

I am a bit turned off by Canon, having been abandoned twice, with six FD cameras and 24 Canon FD lenses with the move to EOS and dropping driver support for XP version of the Canoscan FS2710 film scanner!

I'll use my Canon FS2710 with hacked drivers for 35mm and the new Epson for MF and 12 frame 35mm contact sheets.

I wish I could afford the Nikon 9000. I'd need to sell my F1N and a couple of "L" lenses or my Canon 7s with the 0.95. But I'd rather keep all that!

Thank you all!

p.s. my old MF scanner was a Microtek 6000 with the negs held flat with a piece of glass and a portable light table suspended upside down, shining thru the neg.
__________________
-Lance


Rangefinders used:
Canon IV Sb2; 7s x2; B&H 7; FED 2.f modified for Canon 0.95
Canonet QL17 GIII; Kodak Retina II; Moskva 5; Zeiss SI folder; Medalist II

Rangefinders lenses used:
Canon/Seranar 50/0.95; 50/1.8; 50/1.9; 85/2.0; 100/3.5; 135/4
FSU I50; J3
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2007   #6
gdi
Registered User
 
gdi is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West-Central Connecticut
Posts: 2,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by RObert Budding
Nikon Coolscan 9000.
There you go...

I wouldn't bother with those flatbeds (I tried a 4490 - went back quickly) unless you just want web images.
  Reply With Quote

Plustek makes inexpensive 120 and MF scanners
Old 03-01-2007   #7
Peter55
Leica M5 & Summilux User
 
Peter55's Avatar
 
Peter55 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 100
Plustek makes inexpensive 120 and MF scanners

I think they 4 models for 120 and other MF sizes and they are priced between $90 and $180. I got the Plustek OpticFilm 7200 dedicated 35mm/slide scanner and it works very well.
It has one funny quirk, I need to unplug it and then plug the power supply backin again each time I use it or Window XP wont recognize the USB device.
Other than that it works very nice. I scan at only 300 dpi at 8" x 10" and that is the same as 2400dpi at the film negative size of @ 1.4" x 1". the scanner can do 7200dpi optically but the files would be huge and what I'm getting is very usable printed out to 8" x 10".
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2007   #8
sf
Registered User
 
sf is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,842
Lance:

If you buy a flatbed scanner, the Epson V700 is the only reasonable option. The v700 is a considerably better scanner than the 4490. The V700 is comparable to a dedicated scanner...it really is...IF you buy the Doug Fisher holder with the glass AND you prepare to spend considerable time calibrating your scans every time you use the scanner. Just prepare for spending 20 minutes getting things at the right height every time you scan. Unless you devise a way of locking the height screws...

In a dedicated scanner, I use the Multi Pro by Konica Minolta and it's marvelous. The 9000ED is HUGE and not as highly reviewed, but it is possible to buy it new still (multi pro has been off the market for a long time).

Go here to see my own comparison of a flatbed (v700) and a dedicated (multi pro) :

http://www.shutterflower.com/V700.htm
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2007   #9
Brad Bireley
Registered User
 
Brad Bireley is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The Mountains of Northcentral Pennsylvania
Age: 57
Posts: 901
Quote:
Originally Posted by shutterflower
Lance:

If you buy a flatbed scanner, the Epson V700 is the only reasonable option. The v700 is a considerably better scanner than the 4490. The V700 is comparable to a dedicated scanner...it really is...IF you buy the Doug Fisher holder with the glass AND you prepare to spend considerable time calibrating your scans every time you use the scanner. Just prepare for spending 20 minutes getting things at the right height every time you scan. Unless you devise a way of locking the height screws...

In a dedicated scanner, I use the Multi Pro by Konica Minolta and it's marvelous. The 9000ED is HUGE and not as highly reviewed, but it is possible to buy it new still (multi pro has been off the market for a long time).

Go here to see my own comparison of a flatbed (v700) and a dedicated (multi pro) :

http://www.shutterflower.com/V700.htm

I'm glad to hear this....I just ordered a V700!

Brad
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2007   #10
gdi
Registered User
 
gdi is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West-Central Connecticut
Posts: 2,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by shutterflower
Lance:

If you buy a flatbed scanner, the Epson V700 is the only reasonable option. The v700 is a considerably better scanner than the 4490. The V700 is comparable to a dedicated scanner...it really is...IF you buy the Doug Fisher holder with the glass AND you prepare to spend considerable time calibrating your scans every time you use the scanner. Just prepare for spending 20 minutes getting things at the right height every time you scan. Unless you devise a way of locking the height screws...

In a dedicated scanner, I use the Multi Pro by Konica Minolta and it's marvelous. The 9000ED is HUGE and not as highly reviewed, but it is possible to buy it new still (multi pro has been off the market for a long time).

Go here to see my own comparison of a flatbed (v700) and a dedicated (multi pro) :

http://www.shutterflower.com/V700.htm
I came very close to buying a new Multi Pro about a month ago - but when I read about the support situation (basically there is none - some under warranty are being bought back rather than fixed) I paid the extra for a 9000. I have heard the MP is good, but I never saw head to head comparisons that showed it better that the 9000 - IF you used a glass carrier for the 9000. The carriers on the 9000 really are its achille's heel, I even kept my CS V for 35mm just because of the film feeder....

As for a V700 - I have never seen a good comparison that shows it near the 9000. If you have such comparisons please post, I would be very interested to see them- there is a comparison here for the V700 to the 8000 - that show a substatial difference - http://www.terrapinphoto.com/jmdavis/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-02-2007   #11
anglophone1
Astounded of Antibes
 
anglophone1's Avatar
 
anglophone1 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Antibes, France
Posts: 256
I have a Minolta Multi Pro and a Nikon 8000 [for sale]
Frankly they are both great scanners, I'm keeping the Multi Pro because i like it that little bit more and it takes up less space.
The 8000 is a BIG machine and therfore probably feels more substantial to some, its just too big for my space, otherwise great..........................its for sale in RFF classifieds..............
Clive

www.clive-evans.com
  Reply With Quote

Epson 4490 scans
Old 03-02-2007   #12
lmd91343
There's my Proctor-Silex!
 
lmd91343's Avatar
 
lmd91343 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 399
Epson 4490 scans

Here are my first color MF scans from the 4490. The scans are all factory presets, with no manipulation by me. All I did was re-size, decrease data density and convert to JPG in PS.

The first image is a crop of the flower in the second image.

The camera is a Zeiss Super Ikonta A with a Schnieder Xenar f3.5 75mm (35mm equiv fl = 42mm) (similar in design to Tessar) on 100 ASA Fuji RDP slide film.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg bop2.jpg (236.2 KB, 44 views)
File Type: jpg bop.jpg (273.1 KB, 38 views)
__________________
-Lance


Rangefinders used:
Canon IV Sb2; 7s x2; B&H 7; FED 2.f modified for Canon 0.95
Canonet QL17 GIII; Kodak Retina II; Moskva 5; Zeiss SI folder; Medalist II

Rangefinders lenses used:
Canon/Seranar 50/0.95; 50/1.8; 50/1.9; 85/2.0; 100/3.5; 135/4
FSU I50; J3

Last edited by lmd91343 : 03-02-2007 at 18:55.
  Reply With Quote

4990 detail/resolution
Old 03-02-2007   #13
lmd91343
There's my Proctor-Silex!
 
lmd91343's Avatar
 
lmd91343 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 399
4990 detail/resolution

The first image is a crop of the small brick wall, beneath the telephone pole in the center of the second image.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg brick2.jpg (272.7 KB, 31 views)
File Type: jpg brick.jpg (170.1 KB, 28 views)
__________________
-Lance


Rangefinders used:
Canon IV Sb2; 7s x2; B&H 7; FED 2.f modified for Canon 0.95
Canonet QL17 GIII; Kodak Retina II; Moskva 5; Zeiss SI folder; Medalist II

Rangefinders lenses used:
Canon/Seranar 50/0.95; 50/1.8; 50/1.9; 85/2.0; 100/3.5; 135/4
FSU I50; J3
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
finding a film scanner erikhaugsby Rangefinder Photography Discussion 24 08-22-2006 19:33
overexposing and underdeveloping optimal for scanner? vicmortelmans Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film 22 08-08-2006 13:22
Pacific Image PrimeFilm 1800i Film Scanner Question ClaremontPhoto Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film 6 02-18-2006 05:47
Canon 9950F scanner: be warned in advance kiev4a Other RF 8 03-03-2005 14:41
Best Scanner? GeneW Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film 20 05-04-2004 19:18



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 22:52.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.