[davide]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I've noticed that film scanners with SCSI interfaces go for very cheap as many modern computers don't come with SCSI ports. Any advice on what some really good SCSI film scanners are? I'm interested in doing B&W printing up to around 13x19.

[jeffkrol]

I've noticed that film scanners with SCSI interfaces go for very cheap as many modern computers don't come with SCSI ports. Any advice on what some really good SCSI film scanners are? I'm interested in doing B&W printing up to around 13x19.

Do you want a dedicated 35mm slide/negative scanner?
Here is a good starting point for you:
Digital Scanner Reviews
These are "retail" types. You can find the more professional scanners for fairly cheap(in relation to their real price) in the used market. Only problem I see is that they require very expensive software to run them... that usually is not included or outdated enough to be unusable.. at least this is something to watch for.
For the scoop on really expensive scanners:
Use a drum scanner.
http://www.flatbed-scanner-review.org/drum_scanner_reviews/drum_scanner_reviews_links.html
found one for you...
http://cgi.ebay.com/Creo-Scitex-Eversmart-Jazz-Flatbed-Scanner_W0QQitemZ2603...item3ca0456267
$10,000 retail film scanner for $59... may not work w/ XP or any newer OS's though and no software.
http://cgi.ebay.com/KODAK-Professional-RFS-3570-Plus-Film-Scanner-RFS-3570_W...item5ad5f66836
I find the price spread quite interesting.......
http://shop.ebay.com/?_from=R40&_trksid=m38&_nkw=KODAK+Professional+RFS+3570

[davide]

Thanks for the links. I had seens imaging-resource before but never really took the time to dig into it because it at first seemed like it just recycled manufacturers' info. I'll check it out.

Yes, I am interested in a dedicated film scanner into which I could feed negatives. I've read that drum scanners need a lot of upkeep to keep them functional so I think I would prefer a traditional model. I've read good things about the LS-2000, is that a high quality model and if so are there any others like it?

[jeffkrol]

FLAAR site is not too critical of the 2000 but I think a search for a cheap
Polariod Sprint Scan 4000 would be called for. Depends on the quality you really need.
Polaroid SprintScan 4000.
As a "used old tech" item, the Standard SCSI port on the Polaroid may outweigh any minor losses to the nikon. At 4000dpi I believe you can tweak it to be as good or better then the Nikon. I have a minolta slide scanner w/ a really annoying hard to find SCSI connector in the back and it has annoyed me since I bought the stupid thing which of course became incompatible w/ XP.
Advansys SCSI cards were offered dirt cheap on the web for awhile and had native drivers in XP.. apparently this is the end of that. Compatibility scan w/ Vista said the card was a "no go". Probably dead in 7 as well but I'm not sure... I've left the card in but have gone to USB totally anyways.
IF I had the cash or the need, the jazz II (2750dpi across the entire bed, focus adjustments available) scanner on ebay seems like a sweet deal (I have no clue who the seller is BTW )and should give you slide scans equal to the Nikon. Most of the knock against it was at a price point (and it being a microtek product), which is obviously destroyed on ebay.
Kodak Creo iQsmart2 and Creo iQsmart 3 with oXYgen scanner software replace
A bit on the Polaroid ($900 used on Amazon).
Polaroid 4000

---

Last edited by jeffkrol; 01-03-2010 at 12:55 PM.

[GeneV]

My office mate liked his LS-2000. I suppose if price is the big factor, that is a good way to go. SCSI has always been a pain when I've used it, though.

I'm very happy with the Coolscan 9000, but it is a bit expensive. Those have actually gotten more expensive since they were discontinued.

[davide]

What've you found to be the main problem with using scsi? Is it just the fact that finding computers with ports and drivers for it are rare or are there issues with the connection being lost?

[GeneV]

What've you found to be the main problem with using scsi? Is it just the fact that finding computers with ports and drivers for it are rare or are there issues with the connection being lost?

The first, leading to the second.

Drivers are hard to find, resulting in crashes and lost connections.

[bobrapp]

The first, leading to the second.

Drivers are hard to find, resulting in crashes and lost connections.

I have an old Microtek 120 TF (both scsi and firewire and scans 2 1/4 as well) that lacks drivers for Vista.

I found that by downloading and installing VueScan's demo that it came to life. Since I use Silverfast, the manufacturer's software is of no interest.

The scanner has seen heavy use the past 4 months with not problems.

[GeneV]

I have an old Microtek 120 TF (both scsi and firewire and scans 2 1/4 as well) that lacks drivers for Vista.

I found that by downloading and installing VueScan's demo that it came to life. Since I use Silverfast, the manufacturer's software is of no interest.

The scanner has seen heavy use the past 4 months with not problems.

Sometimes you get lucky like that. However, I remember around my office taking some time to get SCSI scanners going, and futzing around with them constantly. USB has been a joy in comparison.

[Ben_Edict]

Sometimes you get lucky like that. However, I remember around my office taking some time to get SCSI scanners going, and futzing around with them constantly. USB has been a joy in comparison.

Vuescan can control almost any SCSI scanner and is available cheaply for Mac, WIndows and Linux. So, that is a very viable option even for older scanners. I finally used my old Nikon LS-300 with it. It also controlled my Umax Powerlook II and also the later USB scanners.

Ben

[Ben_Edict]

Thanks for the links. I had seens imaging-resource before but never really took the time to dig into it because it at first seemed like it just recycled manufacturers' info. I'll check it out.

Yes, I am interested in a dedicated film scanner into which I could feed negatives. I've read that drum scanners need a lot of upkeep to keep them functional so I think I would prefer a traditional model. I've read good things about the LS-2000, is that a high quality model and if so are there any others like it?

I have used the later Nikon LS-30, which is very similar. BUT a current flatbed like my Epson V700 is simply much better. Resolution is basically en par, but colour, density range and scan speed are all much better, than in those old modells.

Scanners with a good reputation are the Minolta modells and some (not all) of the Polaroid Sprintscans.

If you search the forum, there was a very detailed thread two years (or so) ago, which was very interesting read.

Ben

[GeneV]

Vuescan can control almost any SCSI scanner and is available cheaply for Mac, WIndows and Linux. So, that is a very viable option even for older scanners. I finally used my old Nikon LS-300 with it. It also controlled my Umax Powerlook II and also the later USB scanners.

Ben

Does it include the operating system-level drivers? That was the problem with the paper scanners we had. The computer would not even recognize that they existed.

[Ben_Edict]

Does it include the operating system-level drivers? That was the problem with the paper scanners we had. The computer would not even recognize that they existed.

To my knowledge Vuescan doesn't work with parallel-port scanners, but otherwise with nearly anything. Even most MFPs and dedicated document scanners (Fujitsu for instance) are supported.

But you'll find a comprehensive list on their website:
VueScan Release Notes

Ben

[davide]

I have used the later Nikon LS-30, which is very similar. BUT a current flatbed like my Epson V700 is simply much better. Resolution is basically en par, but colour, density range and scan speed are all much better, than in those old modells.

Scanners with a good reputation are the Minolta modells and some (not all) of the Polaroid Sprintscans.

If you search the forum, there was a very detailed thread two years (or so) ago, which was very interesting read.

Ben

So you'd suggest going with a modern flatbed over a an older dedicated scanner? I'm sure a modern film scanner would be best but that's out of my price range.

[Ben_Edict]

So you'd suggest going with a modern flatbed over a an older dedicated scanner? I'm sure a modern film scanner would be best but that's out of my price range.

Not generally. But if you have the choice between a middle-of-the-road older film scanner (Canon 2700 series, Nikon 2000/3000/30 etc.) and a good modern flatbed, go with the flatbed. Only if you can get a top film scanner from the past, I would prefer that.

You can find some interesting info here:

Detailed test reports and experience reports about film scanners slide scanners: market overview, application in practice (lots of reviews of current an older film scanners)

A Comparison of Various Film Scanners and Digital Captures (very thourough investigation and comparison between different scanners, considered "high-end", inclusing some current flatbeds and film scanners, but also drum scanners - You will find, that for instance the Epson V750 comes very close to the Nikon LS8000!)

Nevertheless, if you only scan 35mm format a dedicated film scanner like the cheap Plustek Optic Film 7500i/7600 might be the preferred choice, whereas a good flatbed scanner gives you the choice to scan larger formats as well (and dedicated film scanners for 120 film or even large format are going to be very expensive).

Ben