What 35mm film scanner you use? Show me the samples

K

kakinchan

Member
Local time
6:14 AM
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
30
For long time, I want to get a 35mm film scanner, mostly for my B&W negs, and some colour slides.

There aren't many choice for a new one, as manufacturers are ceasing the production. I tried to look for a Nikon Coolscan V but no shop stocks anymore. I saw some discussions on the Plustek but not sure about the image quality. And how about the Epson's flatbed? Usually the reviews or forum just discuss but no samples for comparison.

I see lots of good pics and some of them must be scanned somehow. Please post the best of your scanner and help me to decide (if it's still available out there). Cheers :)
 
Coolscan V or 5000 ED is the king of the reasonably priced scanners. Unless you go with something ridiculous, such as a drum scanner, the others are all worse. Some much worse :) Look for a new one, or a used one if that isn't possible. Assuming it hasn't already sold there was a used 5000 ED in the classifieds.
 
I am certainly not a scanning expert, but I did not regret finding a Coolscan 4000 at a Camera Show for a very reasonable price. I see older models selling pretty reasonably as well, but it may take some tech savvy to hook them up.

With the Coolscans, the 4000 and 5000 are essentially the same, but the 4000 is Firewire, not a big concern. Nikon had firmware and software upgrades on their site. The 4000 should be more reasonable in price, and the standard strip feeder can be easily converted to do entire rolls. The accessories seem the same for both.

My local shop uses the 5000 for client's film.

I have the bulk slide feeder, there were two, the last one had more adjustments for different mounts? If you only have a few, you can single feed them.

The 8000 and 9000 are terrific from what I hear, if I saw a good price on either I would certainly consider them, they also do up to 6x9 or so I am told.

I would guess the Epson would be much better for MF than 35, but I hear people use it for 35mm.

How large a file are you looking for?

Regards, John
 
Here is a fullsized, post-processed but unsharpened scan from my Coolscan V ED, straight from Lightroom. Taken on 135 Ektar 100, a Bessa R3A with a VC 90mm f/3.5 APO. As you can see there is a scary amount of detail in such a neg, if only the scanner can bring it out.

Warning: The file is ~20 megapixels and about 25 megabytes in size.

http://rapidshare.com/files/283098905/Scantest_fullsize.jpg
 
Last edited:
Drum Scanner:
Drum.jpg


Plustek 7500:
Plustek_1x.jpg


100% crops at 5000dpi I believe for the Plustek.

I scanned that some time ago, maybe I should scan it again to see if I can get a better result from my experience with it.
 
Here are scans from my epson v500. I used the betterscanning holders. I think I scanned them at 3200 dpi. Two files in black and white and two files in color. 35mm film.

NO sharpening of any sort applied other than 'low' output sharpening.

The files are large. PLEASE DO NOT repeatedly download the files and eat up my bandwith. If that happens, I will just remove them.

Tri-x @ iso 1250 or 1600 or so, developed in diafine.
http://www.strongmace.com/Photography/V500ScansForRFF/BlackAndWhite1.jpg
http://www.strongmace.com/Photography/V500ScansForRFF/BlackAndWhite2.jpg

Ektar 100. Lab developed.
http://www.strongmace.com/Photography/V500ScansForRFF/Color1.jpg
http://www.strongmace.com/Photography/V500ScansForRFF/Color2.jpg
 
I have posted this one before. Fuji Acros 100 EI 200 in diafine. 28mm pentax slr lens. Plustek 7300. Looks as good as any other scanned negative I have seen (except for the scratches). 4146x2715.

click here
 
JohnTF said:
The 8000 and 9000 are terrific from what I hear, if I saw a good price on either I would certainly consider them, they also do up to 6x9 or so I am told.
Click to expand...

The 8000/9000 aren't really better than the 5000. They cover a much bigger area while being just as good, which is enough of a feat to explain its price. If you only have 35mm and do not intend to switch to medium format, you can as well go for the 5000 - it is faster, and there is a bulk feeder available for it.
 
I have an 'old' Canoscan 8800f that often frustrates me (especially with colour, thank god I'm doing b/w mainly) and sometimes happen to positively surprise me...
samples can be found on all the funny sites my signature links to.
 
I've been using a Minolta DS 5400 (first version) for about six years. Virtually all the images in my Gallery were scanned with it.


- Barrett
 
I'm using the Nikon 5000ED with the SA-30 roll adapter, and getting results I like (printed up to 16"x10" so far). I don't have full-size scans available for view, as those suckers are big - typically 40-55MB when producing 16bit greyscale TIFFs from Tri-X. Details can be found in this thread:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76542

and also here if you're interested in looking further at my process.

...Mike
 
sevo said:
The 8000/9000 aren't really better than the 5000. They cover a much bigger area while being just as good, which is enough of a feat to explain its price. If you only have 35mm and do not intend to switch to medium format, you can as well go for the 5000 - it is faster, and there is a bulk feeder available for it.
Click to expand...

The 9000 and 5000 do have some significant differences, 2 vs 3 line CCD, different light source, and ICE capabilities. Whether you will see the differences, I couldn't say - except if you want to use Ice with Kodachrome.
 
Thank you everyone for the replies. The pictures really help me to look for what I want.

I used to developed my B&W but now I want them in digital. And I found the shops out there hardly produce what I what, no matter print or scanning, and I don't think I am asking for too much. Nowadays few shops do good processing and prints but they are far from where I live or work. I only look for something that can produce good prints (from printer) no bigger than 10x16". I have a cheap HP Scanjet 4890 that can do 135 but it is too slow and quality far from my expectation. The worse is I cannot make it work after I upgraded to Vista, even I had installed the new software...

Yes the Coolscan V is good in quality and price but they are not available anymore. I could either look for 2nd hand or get the 5000 ED which is quite expensive to me... so there is no other choices?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom