toksuede
Established
Now that my first film camera in about 10 years is coming (Zeiss Ikon) and the lens has been ordered (40mm 1.4), it's time for a scanner.
I'm looking for a 35mm negative (colour and BW) scanner.
It could be dedicated or it could be a flatbed. The main purpose is to scan the negatives so that it could be uploaded to flickr. Therefore it doesn't have to do 5000 x 3000, rather I would like the quality of the scan to be as high as a sub £150 can possibly be.
Internet has so far been in agreement that the Espson V300, 4490, and the 4990 are good and in the range I'm looking for. Maybe you have a better one in mind.
Oh, I don't mind buying it on ebay. 2nd hand, no problem.
I would very much appreciate any input and inputs.
Ryu
I'm looking for a 35mm negative (colour and BW) scanner.
It could be dedicated or it could be a flatbed. The main purpose is to scan the negatives so that it could be uploaded to flickr. Therefore it doesn't have to do 5000 x 3000, rather I would like the quality of the scan to be as high as a sub £150 can possibly be.
Internet has so far been in agreement that the Espson V300, 4490, and the 4990 are good and in the range I'm looking for. Maybe you have a better one in mind.
Oh, I don't mind buying it on ebay. 2nd hand, no problem.
I would very much appreciate any input and inputs.
Ryu
toksuede
Established
Or the Canoscan 8800F?
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
I have an Epson 'Perfection 4870' - discontinued, but the predesessor of those you mention, and have posted many results ( both colour, and mono) here and on flickr. Yes - flatbeds are reckoned junk, by many here, but I am quite satisfied, I don't print above A4 - and top notch scanner results IMHO are wasted a lot, when viewed from the 'net - on a PC.
Cheers, Dave.
Cheers, Dave.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
And hear's a mono scan (35mm-HP5+) from my Nikkormat, the first was Fuji 400 print.
Dave.
Dave.
toksuede
Established
Thanks Dave.
Do most people who buy crazy expensive scanners (+$1000) print over A4? Why don't they bring it to a lab and have it printed properly?
So my assumption is that if the predecessor (your scanner) can scan this well from colour and BW negatives, the successor (4490 and 4990) is going to do at very worst slightly better than yours.
Are the above images directly from the negative or are they prints?
Just making sure because that's about the quality I need.
Ryu
Do most people who buy crazy expensive scanners (+$1000) print over A4? Why don't they bring it to a lab and have it printed properly?
So my assumption is that if the predecessor (your scanner) can scan this well from colour and BW negatives, the successor (4490 and 4990) is going to do at very worst slightly better than yours.
Are the above images directly from the negative or are they prints?
Just making sure because that's about the quality I need.
Ryu
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
straight from the neg., Epson flat bed carriers take four strips of six, and mine handles up to 4x5
Dave.
toksuede
Established
After posting this thread, I had the chance to read other posts and did not realize that people were so passionate about scanning.
Here are my additional thoughts on my journey to the "okay, this will be good enough for me" scanner:
1. I don't want to spend more that my budget.
2. I don't want one that I need additional accessories to use it with.
3. I don't want one that was introduced more than 2 years ago.
4. I only want to scan negatives, but if it scans A4s or 120/220 I'll just take it as a bonus.
5. I am not going to print from the scan I prodcue with this scanner.
Here are my additional thoughts on my journey to the "okay, this will be good enough for me" scanner:
1. I don't want to spend more that my budget.
2. I don't want one that I need additional accessories to use it with.
3. I don't want one that was introduced more than 2 years ago.
4. I only want to scan negatives, but if it scans A4s or 120/220 I'll just take it as a bonus.
5. I am not going to print from the scan I prodcue with this scanner.
toksuede
Established
So, I've narrowed it down again:
Dedicated scanners: Plustek 7200, Canoscan 8800F
Flatbed: Epson 4490, Epson V300
They are all about the same price, except for the V300.
Which leads me to the conclusion that for the money (less than 100 pounds new), is V300 the best thing out there for my needs?
Would the dedicated negative scanners do a better job than the V300?
Dedicated scanners: Plustek 7200, Canoscan 8800F
Flatbed: Epson 4490, Epson V300
They are all about the same price, except for the V300.
Which leads me to the conclusion that for the money (less than 100 pounds new), is V300 the best thing out there for my needs?
Would the dedicated negative scanners do a better job than the V300?
StaaleS
Established
For gossakes, get something with ICE (unless you only do non-C41 b&w, in which case it's a moot point). I have a Plustek 7200 laying around but have long since moved on to a proper scanner.
toksuede
Established
StaaleS: Thanks. For my B&W, I will stick with non C-41.
And it sounds like Plustek's software doesn't run under OSX.
Which means it's out of the running.
I know (or checked) that 8800F runs silverfast, which has some kind of ICE like technology, right? Might come in handy when I have to scan colour negatives...
As for the V300, very impressed with the samples I saw from one of the RFF members here. Doesn't have ICE, but is it going to be that difficult to remove the dust in PP?
And 4490 has ICE, correct?
And it sounds like Plustek's software doesn't run under OSX.
Which means it's out of the running.
I know (or checked) that 8800F runs silverfast, which has some kind of ICE like technology, right? Might come in handy when I have to scan colour negatives...
As for the V300, very impressed with the samples I saw from one of the RFF members here. Doesn't have ICE, but is it going to be that difficult to remove the dust in PP?
And 4490 has ICE, correct?
StaaleS
Established
Correcting dust-spots and scratches in Photoshop is not exactly difficult. It's just that life simply is too short.
I was quite happy with an Epson V700 personally. I traded it for a Coolscan V primarily because it was a hulking great thing and I have a very small apartment!
I was quite happy with an Epson V700 personally. I traded it for a Coolscan V primarily because it was a hulking great thing and I have a very small apartment!
toksuede
Established
Mmm... V700=too expensive.
So in your opinion, you would rather go for the 4490 (with ICE) over 8800F (ICE like thing, but not really ICE)?
If ICE is that important, I would have to take the V300 out of the running as it doesn't have one...
So in your opinion, you would rather go for the 4490 (with ICE) over 8800F (ICE like thing, but not really ICE)?
If ICE is that important, I would have to take the V300 out of the running as it doesn't have one...
gdi
Veteran
I recently bought a 4870 with SilverFast software - I think I paid about $175 for it. I got it strictly for 4x5 since I have a Nikon 120 scanner.
That left me with a 2400 that I will never use again - it won't do 120, is over 2 years old, and doesn't have ICE. I don't think it is worth shipping to Paris - but if it were, you could have it.
That left me with a 2400 that I will never use again - it won't do 120, is over 2 years old, and doesn't have ICE. I don't think it is worth shipping to Paris - but if it were, you could have it.
hanskerensky
Well-known
StaaleS
Established
Well, if you only want to scan black & white, ICE/any kind of IR dust-detection does not work in the first place so you can happily ignore it in your purchase decision 
For scanning C41 film or slide film, I would not buy a scanner without it though.
An ex-photographer friend of mine has a Canon flatbed scanner and is quite happy with it for scanning negs. I don't know the model number of his unit but I think it's a relative of the 8800, it certainly looks similar.
For scanning C41 film or slide film, I would not buy a scanner without it though.An ex-photographer friend of mine has a Canon flatbed scanner and is quite happy with it for scanning negs. I don't know the model number of his unit but I think it's a relative of the 8800, it certainly looks similar.
toksuede
Established
Thanks Hank.
Did some reasearch on ICE and FARE and the conclusion is that they are pretty much the same thing.
Having been in scanner choosing hell for the past 24 hours, the school of scanning is vast and deep and often controversial.
At the end of the day, if I'm only scanning to upload to the web, does it really matter if it doesn't have ICE, FARE, or whatever?
Wouldn't V300 be enough?
Did some reasearch on ICE and FARE and the conclusion is that they are pretty much the same thing.
Having been in scanner choosing hell for the past 24 hours, the school of scanning is vast and deep and often controversial.
At the end of the day, if I'm only scanning to upload to the web, does it really matter if it doesn't have ICE, FARE, or whatever?
Wouldn't V300 be enough?
toksuede
Established
gdi: Thanks. If I didn't live in Paris, I would have much easier time buying gadgets. This place is a hell hole when it comes to technology...
StaaleS: Now that I asked myself if I would ever scan any C41s, the answer is yes. Which means I will need to ice it or fare it.
Right, this leaves me with 8800F and 4490.
They both work with Macs, don't they? I'm sure Silverfast that comes with the 8800F works with a Mac, but does the 4490 come with Silverfast or Vuescan or their propietary software?
StaaleS: Now that I asked myself if I would ever scan any C41s, the answer is yes. Which means I will need to ice it or fare it.
Right, this leaves me with 8800F and 4490.
They both work with Macs, don't they? I'm sure Silverfast that comes with the 8800F works with a Mac, but does the 4490 come with Silverfast or Vuescan or their propietary software?
StaaleS
Established
I use a PC, so I don't know about Macs. You can run Windows on Macs these days, so I guess it's a non-issue as long as the hardware itself is compatible.
My experience is that scanners come with software enough to do the job, even if it may not exactly be "best of breed". A lot of people swear by VueScan of course, which will work with just about any scanner ever made by man.
My experience is that scanners come with software enough to do the job, even if it may not exactly be "best of breed". A lot of people swear by VueScan of course, which will work with just about any scanner ever made by man.
martin s
Well-known
But who would want _that?
martin
toksuede
Established
I've made my decision.
Currently, there are 2 Epson scanners on Ebay UK:
V500 and 4490.
I just bid (a certain amount, below my budget including S/H) on the V500 and if I get it, I'll be happy. If I don't, I'll go after the 4490.
The only reason I chose this over the 8800F is that I've read enough reports people complaing about the 35mm scanning ability, which was the deal breaker (or maker).
Currently, there are 2 Epson scanners on Ebay UK:
V500 and 4490.
I just bid (a certain amount, below my budget including S/H) on the V500 and if I get it, I'll be happy. If I don't, I'll go after the 4490.
The only reason I chose this over the 8800F is that I've read enough reports people complaing about the 35mm scanning ability, which was the deal breaker (or maker).