Film Scanner Recommendations

DAP · 02-25-2007, 02:48 PM

Hello,

I'm looking for some recommendations on good Film Scanners. I work in B+W film exclusively (if that makes a difference).

Thanks

*benjikan* · 02-25-2007, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by DAP

Hello,

I'm looking for some recommendations on good Film Scanners. I work in B+W film exclusively (if that makes a difference).

Thanks

I am using the Minolta Scan Speed scanner for my 35mm negs and slides. Excellent machine and very good for multi pass scans. Buy "VueScan" software and use it instead of the Minolta soft ware. It allows up to 16 multi passes.

wirrah · 02-25-2007, 06:29 PM

I've been using an Epson 4990 flatbed scanner for B&W 35, 120, 116, 620 and some very old large format negatives. It gives excellent results. However, if I only had 35mm I'd would have got a film scanner like the one mentioned by the previous poster.

I also have been using Vuescan software.

cheers

Greg

**-=JoN=-** · 02-25-2007, 07:10 PM

used to have a km duoscan, forgot the actual model name.

it was good, but just took a while to scan high res images.

edit

it was a dimage dual scan iv

Amazon.com: Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV Film Scanner: Electronics

Nando · 02-26-2007, 10:17 PM

I have a Nikon Coolscan V ED. It works very well. I also recommend ditching the included software and using Vuescan instead. I had much better scans with Vuescan and I don't find it as buggy as the Nikon software.

Cideway · 02-28-2007, 04:55 AM

Another vote for the Epson, especially if you have larger stuff to scan.

fast50 · 03-03-2007, 02:15 AM

Originally Posted by Nando

I have a Nikon Coolscan V ED. It works very well. I also recommend ditching the included software and using Vuescan instead. I had much better scans with Vuescan and I don't find it as buggy as the Nikon software.

I can certainly recommend the Nikon Coolscan V ED (also known as the LS-50 ED). I've also used the Minolta 5400. The Minolta is VERY slow and doesn't have such good ICE. The Nikon is IMO better built and is pretty quick, even with ICE turned on. On paper, the Minolta has significantly better resolution, but I've found it didn't really add much to the output and it can often get colours very wrong.

The Nikon software can be a little unstable, but works ok. I import into Photoshop CS2 via TWAIN, then do all processing in photoshop.

hmcfly · 03-03-2007, 06:28 AM

I have a Minolta Elite 5400ii and it works good. One problem is that all Minoltas have been discontinued so I would stay clear if you are worried about returns. When I did my recearch it was between the Nikon Coolscan V ed and the Minolta. Here is were I went to ask these question for it is a scanning forum and they helped me out.

Digital Darkroom Forum -- Scanning>Scanners>Flatbed

pspentax · 03-05-2007, 02:52 PM

I have a Epson 4870 for about 2 years with good results at 35mm film and fantastics results at 120/220mm film, if you only use 35mm buy a dedicated one, but if you have mixture of films this Epson is fantastic.
I have also played with the new Epson V750 and for me it´s only a litle beter than the 4870 with 35mm film.
Also use the Vuescan or Silverfast software for beter results.

Regards,

Pedro Santos

Lowell Goudge · 05-28-2007, 07:12 AM

I have a minolta DIMAGE II scanner, which has been used to put all 5000 of my slides and 13000 prints into digital.

It is definitely NOT fast, and it took 3 years from start to finish, during available time. I was impressed by the image quality and the reliability, as I expected the thing to die with the work load.

now it sits by and does nothing as I am finsihed with film.

Bryce · 06-03-2007, 02:31 PM

I've had quite a go around with scanning negs.
If you're doing B+W the old fashioned way, the best image quality is hands down a flatbed scan of a good print made optically in your darkroom.
I've used a variety of film scanners, and none of them will touch that method for image quality. Of course you have to make a print first...
The way I actually scan from a negative anymore is with a DSLR attached to a bellows unit/ slide copier and macro lens. The lens I use is the 75mm Nikkor from the enlarger...
I light the negative by bouncing a flash off of a piece of whiteboard.
The results are fast and beat the Minolta SD III I have for overall image quality, though a Nikon 4000/ 5000/ 8000/ 9000 series would be better yet.
Hope this is useful.

J2R · 06-06-2007, 02:11 PM

I've been looking into the very same thing over the last few days and I'm leaning towards the Epson V700 or maybe V750 at the moment. Very thorough reviews are given here:

EPSON V700 review
EPSON V700 review

I also have a medium format camera, which pushes me more towards a flat-bed scanner, but if you read Vincent's reviews above, you may get the impression that one of these would be a good choice even just for 35mm.

Rolly · 06-06-2007, 07:22 PM

I'm using an Epson RX650 (3 in 1) with quite satisfactory results.
Their own software enables total adjustment of the image in a 'preview' mode and dust/grain management. The final scans are surprisingly good.
Prints are of high quality.
Awfully slow as a copy machine tho'.( It seems to work by scanning to memory and then printing.)

*Mike Cash* · 06-07-2007, 05:46 AM

Just a few minutes ago I took delivery of an Epson GT70FLU2 adapter for my Epson GT-8300UF scanner. The scanner itself handled 35mm negatives, but the adapter opens it up to handle medium format (120/220) and 4x5 as well. Seems to work really well so far. I picked it up NIB off Yahoo Japan Auctions for about $20.

kjao · 06-07-2007, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by -=JoN=-

used to have a km duoscan, forgot the actual model name.

it was good, but just took a while to scan high res images.

edit

it was a dimage dual scan iv

Amazon.com: Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV Film Scanner: Electronics

I have got one too. It was the best I could afford when I first started photography two years ago. It does a very decent job. I think it was the best at that price range. I remembered back then, the better ones all cost $800+.

cheers
Kenny