[dj_saunter]

Hama “Combo” Photo Scanner | PhotographyBLOG

From the looks of it, I imagine very poor performance.

[Aristophanes]

Hama “Combo” Photo Scanner | PhotographyBLOG

From the looks of it, I imagine very poor performance.

It's junk. Negative scanners require software and calibration that can take the orange cast out of the scan, and with hundreds of different films and variations, this little device cannot do the job.

[stevebrot]

There are multiple entries at this price point. Most are capable of fair results similar to drug store scans.


Steve

[ChrisPlatt]

Hama usually sells decent stuff.
I'd like to see the specs before passing judgement.

Chris

[artobest]

I wouldn't get too excited.

[ytterbium]

Hmm, i wonder:
*Does it have RAW-like output (e.g. 16-bit TIFF), at what bit depth does the imager work?
*Can it do BW?
*Can it do slides?
*Can it do 120?

For most part it depends on the software provided. Does it force the size for negative scanning, or allow only "converted" (from negative), 8-bit (or even worse, lossy JPEG) output. etc. If its flexible enough, it might be a good basic alternative to the store (which charges quite a lot for 120), even when the quality is just ok.

[raider]

I m also interested in this. Which scanner is recommended for scanning negative and convert to dng raw? Something that does not require me to sell my kidney please

[goddo31]

I m also interested in this. Which scanner is recommended for scanning negative and convert to dng raw? Something that does not require me to sell my kidney please

How much is your kidney worth to you?
I use the Epson V700 which can be bought for around $700 locally - not really a cheap option but allows for decent quality and a large amount of versatility (it's a big flatbed).
You need to be careful with scanners, as almost all of them lie about the max usable dpi they can provide. For example, the V700 is rated at 6400dpi yet in practical terms there isn't much point scanning over 2400dpi. In the more affordable range there is the V500 and a similar model from Canon (I think). The problem with scanning 35mm is that you need as much scanning resolution as you can get. My V700 scans @ 2400dpi end up with about 7MP.

I don't think that scanning to DNG is really necessary. I scan to TIFF which gives you a huge uncompressed file with plenty of quality. Adjustments to the range of tones that the scanner picks up is easily done before the scan; you might be amazed at how much latitude (DR) B&W negative film really has.

[raider]

Hmm $700 is a lot to spend. I don't think I can justify that since I m only starting out to do film. Any cheaper alternative?

[artobest]

Any cheaper alternative?

Second-hand Konica-Minolta Dimage ScanDual IV

[raider]

Thanks. That gives me a good place to start. I see that its streetprice when new is around $300 so I hope the used price is a lot cheaper. Thanks again.

[magkelly]

It's max dpi is 300. Supposedly that's good enough for a photo or paper print, but I've never been satisfied with less than 600dpi when it comes to scanning images. For work docs 300 dpi is fine, but for pics? I like 600dpi minimum and I would never want a scanner that couldn't do that. Plus if the output is said to be 300dpi max you know that's probably with computer enhancement and it's not that great. This thing is almost like those really low end digital cameras that can barely get a 75dpi photo for web with.

[raider]

magkelly, are u referring to the konica-minolta or the other scanner?

[magkelly]

The Hama, 300 dpi is in the blurb as the max for it...

[goddo31]

300dpi hardly provides any enlargement capability for 35mm film... Probably OK for prints though.