Good (Cheap) Film scanner
Old 02-17-2013   #1
gooseta
Registered User
 
gooseta is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 51
Good (Cheap) Film scanner

Hi, everyone, I usually mail my rolls to some place to get them scanned and developed, but I was wondering if there are any good film scanners so I wouldn't have to pay as much to develop and scan. I could probably afford one at £200. Also, any software I should look at for film scanning?

Should I look for a dedicated slide scanner :
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Plustek-Opti...1100154&sr=1-1
Or scanners in general?
__________________
Digi
D800, 14-24, Sigma 35mm f1.4

Film
Contax 139Q, 28 f2.8
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #2
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Go for a dedicated film scanner, and be aware that price and quality are depressingly closely related.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #3
johannielscom
Ich bin ein Barnacker
 
johannielscom's Avatar
 
johannielscom is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Universitas Terre Threntiae
Posts: 7,363
Try to find a Minolta ScanDual or a Canoscan 2700 model for that amount. Or a Plustek 7200.

Stay away from HP flatbed scanners, they usually need to initialize the lamp before each scan and it takes forever to get a roll done.

Some people get good results with Epson flatbeds and the Canon f8800 ain't no slouch either.


Half of any good result is good knowledge of the process and software, scanners produce unsatisfactory results if you don't process the scanned image.
__________________
Gegroet,
Johan Niels

I write vintage gear reviews on www.johanniels.com |

flickr | instagram |
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #4
astro8
Registered User
 
astro8's Avatar
 
astro8 is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 56
Posts: 552
You could probably find a Canon FS4000 for that price. I did and am very pleased with it....but they are thin on the ground.

Edit:
4000dpi, very good optics, 6 frame batch scanning, usb1 or scsi. I have the Canon Filmget software working under Windows 7 but prefer to use Vuescan.
__________________
-Greg

My RFF Gallery

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #5
wallace
Registered User
 
wallace's Avatar
 
wallace is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 484
The Polaoid Sprintscan 35plus is a very fine scanner with 2700 real resolution.
The only downside is that you need a SCSI adapter.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #6
wallace
Registered User
 
wallace's Avatar
 
wallace is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 484
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Polaroid-Spr...item485015ea23

$30 only! Unbelievable. It really is a fantastic scanner. I have enough film holders and can help you out if you go this route.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #7
Pete B
Registered User
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Pete B is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooseta View Post
Hi, everyone, I usually mail my rolls to some place to get them scanned and developed, but I was wondering if there are any good film scanners so I wouldn't have to pay as much to develop and scan. I could probably afford one at £200. Also, any software I should look at for film scanning?

Should I look for a dedicated slide scanner :
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Plustek-Opti...1100154&sr=1-1
Or scanners in general?
2 days ago I ordered this very scanner from this same seller! It will be excellent value for 35mm. It's cheaper than the 8200, 7600 and 7400 I was considering but has the same hardware. I'll use it with vuescan.
Pete
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #8
Thardy
Registered User
 
Thardy is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete B View Post
2 days ago I ordered this very scanner from this same seller! It will be excellent value for 35mm. It's cheaper than the 8200, 7600 and 7400 I was considering but has the same hardware. I'll use it with vuescan.
Pete
It's good to know that someone still makes scanners. Can you post some samples when you get it up and running?
__________________
Thomas

Flickr

Tumblr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #9
RallyFan
Registered User
 
RallyFan is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New England
Posts: 27
I read a lot of good things about the Plustek's, and was tempted to pick one up, but I knew I'd probably also want to do MF in the future so I recently grabbed an Epson V500. For my purposes (web and mostly 5x7 prints), it was a steal at $135. Found I had to buy the betterscanning glass as well since I could never get my negatives flat enough in the supplied carriers.

I'm still in the testing phase with both the scanner and camera (It's been a while since I've shot and developed film), but here's a quick sample:



This is with Epson's software, which isn't terrible. I'd like to try Vuescan and SilverFast in the future.

I know when I was researching a scanner in the lower price ranges, for each model it would be a 50/50 split between happy, glowing reviews and people that flat out despised the product. I think the main catalyst for people's disappointment with a scanner is that they are expecting Nikon Coolscan quality at department store flat bed prices, and that's just not going to happen. So my recommendation would be that if you find one you think you'll like, go ahead and give it a try. Amazon has a pretty good return policy if you don't like it, so no harm, no foul.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #10
gooseta
Registered User
 
gooseta is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete B View Post
2 days ago I ordered this very scanner from this same seller! It will be excellent value for 35mm. It's cheaper than the 8200, 7600 and 7400 I was considering but has the same hardware. I'll use it with vuescan.
Pete
Thanks for the advice, I've placed an order for the 8100 and a copy of VueScan
__________________
Digi
D800, 14-24, Sigma 35mm f1.4

Film
Contax 139Q, 28 f2.8
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #11
Pete B
Registered User
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Pete B is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by RallyFan View Post
I read a lot of good things about the Plustek's, and was tempted to pick one up, but I knew I'd probably also want to do MF in the future so I recently grabbed an Epson V500.

Found I had to buy the betterscanning glass as well
I've got some better scanning Glass coming for my V700. I decided I can't justify the Plustek 120 for my photography. The 8100 and my V700 leave alot of cash for film.......and a freezer.
Pete
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #12
Pete B
Registered User
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Pete B is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooseta View Post
Thanks for the advice, I've placed an order for the 8100 and a copy of VueScan
Good stuff. Perhaps some current users will give us some tips.
Pete
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #13
burancap
Registered User
 
burancap's Avatar
 
burancap is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Carolina
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete B View Post
I've got some better scanning Glass coming for my V700. I decided I can't justify the Plustek 120 for my photography. The 8100 and my V700 leave alot of cash for film.......and a freezer.
Pete
I have, so far, done exactly the same thing.

I ordered the BS holders and ANR glass for both 120 and 35. Depending on the results, the 8100 is on my radar for 35.
__________________
Jeff
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #14
gb hill
Registered User
 
gb hill's Avatar
 
gb hill is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Carolina
Age: 59
Posts: 5,871
I bought an Epson V500 & love it. I can now do 35mm & 120 film. I no nothing much at all about scanning film but I have learned very quick on this scanner. If all you are interested in is posting to web a flatbed is all you need. Here is one of my 1st 35mm uploads using this scanner. BTW this is a straight scan. All I did in PS 6 which came with the scanner was resize for web.
__________________
Greg
flickr
Bessa R & L
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #15
helenhill
Chasing Shadows ... Light
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,578
YAY and Thank You to Rallyfan & Gbhill/Greg

I have been wanting to do Medium Format for awhile now...the only thing stopping me from buying a Camera was having to Buy another scanner ( i have the plustek 7600i which i Adore)

So for that Price 135.00 the Epson V500 is Worthwhile for me to now Indulge in MF
Who knows if I love the V500 my plustk may be up in our Classifieds, only Time will tell ..

Thanks Gents for the heads Up !
__________________
Flickr.

________________________
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #16
Highway 61
Revisited
 
Highway 61's Avatar
 
Highway 61 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,787
No flatbed scanner will do justice to 35mm negatives. I say no.

The reason isn't with the resolution but with the Dmax.

So there isn't any other solution for the knowledgeable photographer than a flatbed for MF and a film scanner for 35mm negatives (or slides, for which the Dmax is even more critical).

Any Epson flatbed onwards from the 4490 will perform brilliantly with MF films. Even the $55 3170 flatbed which I use (after some DIY tuning) now does so.

For 35mm of course there is the Coolscan IV/4000/V/5000 option but I know very well what they cost now.

So look at Minolta film scanners which were very performing machines. The DualScan II or III (basically identical) are now dirt cheap and they scan at a genuine 2820dpi res. with a very capable Dmax.

And a Minolta DualScan II will floor any V700 thing as for 35mm scanning.

All in all this solution (4490 or 4990 flatbed for MF and DualScan II or III for 35mm, all bought off the second hand market) will cost less than a V700 or a V750.

Would you wear summer mocasins during some blizzard episodes, or snow boots on the beach in the middle of August ?
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #17
teleparallel
Registered User
 
teleparallel's Avatar
 
teleparallel is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Age: 34
Posts: 133
I use a simple V330 Epson Scanner. And the results are really good. But works only for 35mm. I use the Epson software, but don't apply any adjustment by it. And then, to complete, I use the unsharp mask on GIMP software(I'm a linux junkie). Awesome results. I will post an example.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #18
teleparallel
Registered User
 
teleparallel's Avatar
 
teleparallel is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Age: 34
Posts: 133
Link to the gallery

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...photoid=200015
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #19
Wahoo
Washing on Siegfried Line
 
Wahoo's Avatar
 
Wahoo is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway 61 View Post
Even the $55 3170 flatbed which I use (after some DIY tuning) now does so.
Hmmm, DIY tuning to an Epson 3170 flatbed . . . Tell us more ?

Thanks

PS I have 4 Microtek/Polaroid 4000t including 1+plus and 2 4000tf's.

Here's a Kiev 4AN Jupiter neg. scanned with a Microtek 4000tf.

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #20
gooseta
Registered User
 
gooseta is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 51
Anyone know a good developer in London or the UK? I've looked at Bayeux because drop-in is easy, anyone here in the uk know of a good place? They're the only ones I've found that do e6 for my velvia too.
__________________
Digi
D800, 14-24, Sigma 35mm f1.4

Film
Contax 139Q, 28 f2.8
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #21
BW400CN
Bessamatic forever!
 
BW400CN is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 371
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzardkid View Post
Try to find a Minolta ScanDual or a Canoscan 2700 model for that amount. Or a Plustek 7200.

Stay away from HP flatbed scanners, they usually need to initialize the lamp before each scan and it takes forever to get a roll done.

Some people get good results with Epson flatbeds and the Canon f8800 ain't no slouch either.


Half of any good result is good knowledge of the process and software, scanners produce unsatisfactory results if you don't process the scanned image.
the Plustek 7200 and the Reflecta CrystalScan 7200 are the same - aren´t they?
All of my scans are done with a Reflecta and most of them are just out of the scanner

http://www.flickr.com/photos/6954153...7629603480680/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #22
gb hill
Registered User
 
gb hill's Avatar
 
gb hill is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Carolina
Age: 59
Posts: 5,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway 61 View Post

So look at Minolta film scanners which were very performing machines. The DualScan II or III (basically identical) are now dirt cheap and they scan at a genuine 2820dpi res. with a very capable Dmax.

And a Minolta DualScan II will floor any V700 thing as for 35mm scanning.

All in all this solution (4490 or 4990 flatbed for MF and DualScan II or III for 35mm, all bought off the second hand market) will cost less than a V700 or a V750.

Would you wear summer mocasins during some blizzard episodes, or snow boots on the beach in the middle of August ?
Minolta DSII on Amazon is $900.00 & will not scan 120 film. Out of the 7 reviews over 1/2 of them were negative. I'd pass on this scanner. I see some good output on here (RFF) with flatbed scanners.
__________________
Greg
flickr
Bessa R & L
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #23
Gregoyle
Registered User
 
Gregoyle is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 203
I got my Minolta Scan Dual III for about USD 185 used on Amazon marketplace. They can be found for less than that on Ebay, not sure about UK though.

I'm happy with the output, the few pics in my gallery were scanned with it. It doesn't have Digital ICE, but since I mostly use it for black and white that doesn't matter much for me.

One nice thing about it is that the film holder has tight cross pieces that help flatten films with a longitudinal curl like Tri-X.

-Greg
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #24
John Bragg
Registered User
 
John Bragg's Avatar
 
John Bragg is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Penwithick, Cornwall U.K.
Age: 58
Posts: 1,267
Plustek 7400 is working well for me with the supplied silverfast software. I highly reccomend it !
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2013   #25
paradoxbox
Registered User
 
paradoxbox is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 424
I bought an Epson V700 last month for under $100, you can find them if you search and are lucky.

The scan quality is pretty good though for 35mm dedicated film scanners are probably better, for medium and large format it's a very nice machine.

I previously used an Epson V500 but it had been damaged in shipping causing the glass to sag and eventually just fall, didn't feel like repairing it.
__________________
Epson R-D1, Ricoh GRD III, Rollei TLR's, Lots of others
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2013   #26
Highway 61
Revisited
 
Highway 61's Avatar
 
Highway 61 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by gb hill View Post
Minolta DSII on Amazon is $900.00 & will not scan 120 film. Out of the 7 reviews over 1/2 of them were negative. I'd pass on this scanner. I see some good output on here (RFF) with flatbed scanners.
Minolta DSII has been discontinued for long and I don't know which fool would pay $900 for it.

The average ballpark for it is around $200 or less.

Any sensible person knows that the Minolta DSII - DSIII - DSIV are excellent film scanners, on par with the Coolscan IV once you scan in 16bits TIFF RVB mode. Come on.

Of course it won't scan MF. It's a 35mm dedicated film scanner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wahoo View Post
Hmmm, DIY tuning to an Epson 3170 flatbed . . . Tell us more ?
Removing some white plastic between the two thin fluorescent tubes and getting the lightbox about 5cm farer from the negatives. Putting the negatives directly on the window glass (emulsion side down) and covering the negatives with an anti-Newton glass sheet (anti-Newton side down).

Throwing the negatives holders away.

Huge improvement.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2013   #27
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by gooseta View Post
Anyone know a good developer in London or the UK? I've looked at Bayeux because drop-in is easy, anyone here in the uk know of a good place? They're the only ones I've found that do e6 for my velvia too.
AG Photo Lab
The Darkroom
Snaps Photo Services (I have only just sent off my first couple of rolls here)
Genie

I believe all these guys do E6.

If you want somewhere you can walk into in London, there is Metro, they are a pro lab and £££, but I guess they're doing something right as they can afford a nice big shop in London.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2013   #28
Pete B
Registered User
 
Pete B's Avatar
 
Pete B is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway 61 View Post
Minolta DSII has been discontinued for long and I don't know which fool would pay $900 for it.
I'll sell mine for half that, just PM me
Pete
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2013   #29
Gregoyle
Registered User
 
Gregoyle is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 203
I have never seen a V700 for anything even approaching $100. If you find one for that price I would say grab it before someone else does! One advantage of the V700 is that you can do 24 frames at once, which makes batch scanning a lot less labor intensive. The Plusteks require user intervention for every frame, and the Minoltas do up to 6 frames at a time. I think the Epson V500 can do 12 frames in one batch.

I think the best bang for the buck (power for the pound?) is the used Minoltas. If you want something that can also do medium format, maybe a used Epson 4490 or 4990 (the precursors to the V500).

If you require a scanner currently in production, Plustek and Epson are almost the only game in town, although Pacific Image/Reflecta makes scanners, too.

-Greg
  Reply With Quote

DIY Tuning to an Epson 3170 flatbed.
Old 02-18-2013   #30
Wahoo
Washing on Siegfried Line
 
Wahoo's Avatar
 
Wahoo is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 168
DIY Tuning to an Epson 3170 flatbed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway 61 View Post
Removing some white plastic between the two thin fluorescent tubes and getting the lightbox about 5cm farer from the negatives. Putting the negatives directly on the window glass (emulsion side down) and covering the negatives with an anti-Newton glass sheet (anti-Newton side down).

Throwing the negatives holders away.

Huge improvement.
Thanks Highway 61, I had the same idea with my 3170 some 4 or 5 years ago, I removed all the boards and upgraded the capacitors to stargets etc. new connecting wire soldered directly to boards and I even managed to get some 10uF Oscons up on the scanning head.

Here's a scan with the Epson 3170.

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2013   #31
Bob Michaels
nobody special
 
Bob Michaels's Avatar
 
Bob Michaels is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Apopka FL (USA)
Age: 75
Posts: 3,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway 61 View Post
..................... Any sensible person knows that the Minolta DSII - DSIII - DSIV are excellent film scanners, on par with the Coolscan IV once you scan in 16bits TIFF RVB mode. ......................
I used a Scan Dual II for many years and only upgraded to the MultiPro when I began shooting medium format. I still occasionally print from the old SDII files and see nothing wrong with them even today.

Here is a file scanned on a ScanDual II. You can pixel peep in Photoshop and see excellent resolution.

__________________
http://www.bobmichaels.org
internet forums appear to have an abundance of anonymous midgets prancing on stilts
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2013   #32
BradM
Registered User
 
BradM's Avatar
 
BradM is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 64
I'm considering the Canon CS9000F and seen good reviews. Anyone here got one?
__________________
FSU, Yashica, Olympus and Pentax user.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2013   #33
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,906
I know people disparage flatbeds for 35mm but I've printed and shown large prints 17 x 22 prints based off 35mm scans on an Epson 4990 and printed on a 3800. They look as good as darkroom prints I used to make but I've never gone that big in the darkroom.

Remember if your ultimate goal is printing or the web, absolute sharpness at 100% on screen at some ridiculous DPI isn't really significant. At some point as long as the quality of the final output satisfies you, you have to call it good enough.

The perfect is the enemy of the good.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2013   #34
BradM
Registered User
 
BradM's Avatar
 
BradM is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 64
Yes, I'm kind of going that way myself. I've never printed large prints and if I ever wanted to it probably be more economical to take the negative to a professional darkroom and have it done on an enlarger there, rather than creating huge digital files... just a thought...
__________________
FSU, Yashica, Olympus and Pentax user.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2013   #35
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
 
OurManInTangier's Avatar
 
OurManInTangier is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,057
I don't mean to hijack the thread but as someone coming back to film I'd be interested to know roughly where my scanner lies in the 'any good' stakes.

I'm using the nikon coolscan ED IV which, with Vuescan software, seems to give very good results. However, I'm still on the shallow end of the learning curve for both software and scanner so may be able to get alot more out of it.

I bought it used around six years ago and have forgotten what I paid for it, to illustrate my lack of knowledge I checked prices on Drum Scanners as I know they're top end.... It quickly transpired that top end is waaaay out of my price bracket and probably beyond my needs too.
__________________
Cheers
Simon

| SLP: Work website
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2013   #36
Highway 61
Revisited
 
Highway 61's Avatar
 
Highway 61 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by OurManInTangier View Post
I'd be interested to know roughly where my scanner lies in the 'any good' stakes
It lies in the very very very good stakes.

The trick (as with every scanner) is to have the scanner capture all what it can off the film, then produce a file with lots of headroom so that you can tweak it in an excellent and non-destructive image editor software.

When NikonScan could still be used, using that software to tweak the preview before generating the file made sense, because NikonScan is a clone of PhotoShop.

Now that your OS forces you to use VueScan, scan as explained above (in 16bits per channel mode) and generate a large TIFF file which you will then open in PhotoShop to tweak it.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2013   #37
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
 
OurManInTangier's Avatar
 
OurManInTangier is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,057
Thanks Highway61.

Sounds like I'm on the right track with my scanning workflow from what you've described. I try to produce a relatively 'flat' scan to provide a large tonal range in a TIFF format and make my adjustments in a combination of PS, LR and (oddly, but I like the way you can make adjustments) SilverEfex.

I'm still on a steep curve getting the best from Vuescan but I think I'm getting there.

Thanks and again, sorry to hijack!
__________________
Cheers
Simon

| SLP: Work website
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 13:00.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.