35mm film scanner

[Dunn]

What is a pretty decent 35mm film scanner for a low price? I just want an easy way to get my negatives to digital. I'll mainly post them on the web and maybe do some prints from them up to 8x10.

I was looking at the Epson 4490 or V500. I've been reading around a little and they seem decent, but most people were saying they produced better results with medium format. I was wondering if there was a scanner that did a better job with 35mm black and white negatives. Maybe Canon? I'm trying to spend no more than $200.

I just want a scanner that will give good results, is easy to use and can produce a pretty decent 8x10 print if needed.

Thanks.

 

[Chris101]

The Epsons you refer to are OK for web images and small prints. The main issue is that most flatbed scanners are not optimized for scanning 35mm film. For this reason, dedicated 35mm scanners are used when making prints. The hey-day of film scanning is past, and the best machines in that class are no longer made, but are still available on the used market - Minolta D'image and Nikon Coolscan machines, for example. Currently the feild has narrowed, but people are now buying the Plustek 35mm scanners. These relative newcomers scan at 7200 dpi and seem to give a very printable image.

 

[LKeithR]

I have a V750 which works very well but it is out of your price range. From what I have read the Plusteks are getting some pretty good reviews. Definitely a good place to start looking...

 

[Roger Hicks]

The Epsons you refer to are OK for web images and small prints. The main issue is that most flatbed scanners are not optimized for scanning 35mm film. For this reason, dedicated 35mm scanners are used when making prints. The hey-day of film scanning is past, and the best machines in that class are no longer made, but are still available on the used market - Minolta D'image and Nikon Coolscan machines, for example. Currently the feild has narrowed, but people are now buying the Plustek 35mm scanners. These relative newcomers scan at 7200 dpi and seem to give a very printable image.

Seconded. I dread to think what will happen when my Dimage packs up.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Proteus617]

Flatbeds are mostly limited by the inability to hold the negative truly flat. Less than $200 buys you a nice Epson new, or look for an older model used and spend the extra on negative holders (or just the ANR glass) from betterscanning.com.

 

[randomm]

Aside from some minor alignment issues I've been very happy with the Plustek 7500i donated to be my my brother in law last year.

IQ certainly is adequate for my uses (A4 size bubblejet prints).

 

[MC JC86]

I've got an Epson V600 bought new from Amazon for $179.. all the images in my Flickr are a result of it they're of an acceptable IQ and only limited by my own shortcomings as a photographer. I've used it for up to 6x9cm negatives and transparencies; they definitely produce better results with 120 than 35mm but what doesn't 😉 Like almost anything in photography or computers, buying a "one size fits all" solution somewhats limits the quality of it's output. All around, it gets the job done but expect a lot of work flattening negatives if you develop your own film and also time in photoshop.

 

[Chris101]

... expect a lot of work flattening negatives if you develop your own film ...

A couple pieces of anti-newton glass works wonders in the flatness department. For example:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/45779-REG/Omega_246003_Anti_Newton_Glass_4x5_Top.html

 

[MC JC86]

A couple pieces of anti-newton glass works wonders in the flatness department. For example:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/45779-REG/Omega_246003_Anti_Newton_Glass_4x5_Top.html

Do you just put that on the glass with the negative sandwiched within and not use the mask then?

 

[Chris101]

Generally for my larger negs (I use a Coolscan for 35mm) I put them emulsion down on the platen and lay the AN glass on top of them (contacting the non-emulsion side.)

 

[damien.murphy]

The elephant in this thread, is that flatbeds give softer, lower resolution scans. Most tests show flatbeds to top out, anywhere between 1600- 2200 dpi, depending on the flatbed in question. Beyond these ranges, flatbeds have been proven in tests not to provide any additional resolution, just additional pixels.

I have a Canon 8800F which is nearer the lower end of the above performance range, whereas the Epson V700/ 750 holds court at the other end of the range.

Re: film flatness, I have personally had no issues with 35mm film flatness. Then I have no qualms about placing sheets with freshly cut negative strips, under a heavy book when the need arises (not very often). I can't say the same for medium format, which curls like a divil, and probably benefits a lot from the likes of newton glass/ better scanning holders.

Hope this helps. You have your work cut out for you, if you want a sub-$200 scanner, and 10x8 prints, imo.

 

[codester80]

The Epson V500 is a nice scanner. I've had no problems with it and am happy with the scans I'm getting from it. I find the weight of the lid of V500 does a pretty good job of crushing the negatives fairly flat, as flat as I've ever been able to get a negative in an enlarger without fussing with anti-newton glass. I've always been pleased with my prints from both the slightly curved negs in an enlarger and in the scanner.

 

[dmc]

I have a V750 which works very well but it is out of your price range. From what I have read the Plusteks are getting some pretty good reviews. Definitely a good place to start looking...

I second the V750, it does an excellent job of scanning my negs.