Beginner scanner advice sought

[lxmike]

I plan to start scanning 35mm negs, mainly b&w for the first time and so l am on the lookout for a scanner, what would you recommend for someone new to scanning, thanks in advance for any help, what are the good classic scanners out there

 

[sjb79]

I've been using the Epson V500 for a number of years and it still does a good job at a reasonable price. I've always used the bundled software which is easy enough to use. It can also scan medium format film for when that bug bites you in the future.

 

[shawn]

The price has really gone up on them but the Pakon 135 (Kodak) scanners are great. Not super resolution (6mp) but they do very well for what they are. The big pluses for them is it will scan a full 36exp roll of film in about 5 minutes, it has Kodaks magic for color negatives, ICE for color (IR repair for scratch) and using its alternate interface it can handle odd shaped sizes such as panoramic, half frame cameras and square format. Downsize is cost (they used to sell for under $300 used) and you need either an old computer running an older version of windows or a virtual machine (I use VirtualBox on a Mac) running an older version of Windows.

I also have a Nikon CoolScan 8000 which is a beast of a machine. It will do medium format or 12 frames of 35mm at a time. Since getting the Pakon I haven't even turned it on. It is considerably higher resolution than the Pakon but it takes at least an hour to scan a roll of 36 exp. film and the Pakon is just far more convenient. If I ever have anything critical I want to scan I'll use the Nikon but otherwise it is all Pakon now.

Shawn

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

Mike, I see from your gear list you are 35mm. Scanners for 35mm come in different flavors; I have one of each.

Flatbeds e.g. Epson V500, V600 do a good job within limits. Fine for web/email/screen use. In my testing, I can make good prints from their scans at 6x the linear dimension of the negative. 8x10 from 35mm would be a little dicey, but nice prints from medium format for sure.

Film scanners are better. Nikon Coolscan V or 5000 will get everything that's on the negative. 8x10 prints for sure, 12x18 likely.

Issue for both types of scanners is the software. I use Vuescan, but everyone has their favorite.

Today, I would put a macro lens on one of your Fuji digital bodies, rig up lighting and a copy stand. Again, there's a software issue, getting the right tonality requires more than a simple inversion of the digital file for both color-neg and B&W. See camera-scan threads here (I've made several posts w/examples.) 14MPx or 24MPx with a good lens will get everything that's on the negative and make great prints.

Tomorrow, and maybe today, I can produce excellent scans with an iPhone 7 Plus, the $90 Moment Macro lens, a light pad, and the DNG file from a camera app. Seriously. Very close to the best of the above.

Out of my reach are the Flextight and drum scanners. Ultimate in scanning. How much better?

And, finally, a few labs have machines that will develop your film and return excellent 4000x6000 scans, jpg only. See Precision (sponsor here) and North Coast Photographic Services.

Hope this is helpful.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

Current favorite glass: CV Nokton 50mm 1.5

Also a favorite here.

 

[Dayrell bishop]

I have been very pleased with my Epson v700 for all sises of film , cant understand why others say its no good for 35mm . All of my pictures on here are from my v700 except the digital ones.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have Epson scanner for so long what I don't remember exact model anymore.
V550 or V500... It works great with Epson software. I have one of the first Plustek and used it with famous and less famous scan utilities. I can't remember names anymore, because those are so-so applications comparing to Epson's one. With Epson sw here is absolutely nothing to do. Full auto is great. Silverfast or whatever it called and else is great software if you like to deal with software scanning parameters (and believe it makes any difference from auto).
Flatbed allows to scan by dozen at one time. Plustek will scan better, but frame only.
Basically only two manufacturers left. Epson and Plustek. The rest like PI is exotic or dead, supported by one guy in garage kind of service. Nikon, Pakon.
Oh, here is With camera. No dust removal, no convention from negative. All manual. But very photo gear heads forum style. Five thousands digital Leica, some old, so-so macro lens and Leica copy stand wich is hard to find. It will make you scan elite club member. But your film better be in absolutely perfect condition.

 

[Godfrey]

A Nikon Coolscan IV or V is probably the best 35mm film scanner ever made, from a ruggedness and durability point of view. I use my Coolscan V whenever I have more than a couple of negs to scan. I've still got the Nikon Super Coolscan 9000 as well, but I've not really used it in about a year or so ... Too much trouble to set up.

Modern digital cameras have made scanning negatives on a onesy-twosy basis much more efficient if used in a copy setup. A Sony A7 body fitted with an appropriate macro lens (a Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 pre-AI with M-Tube for 1:1 like mine can be bought in excellent condition for around $90) does a great job for this purpose. A decent light source, a tripod or copy stand to hold the camera properly, you can probably put the whole copy kit together for less than the current price of a decent scanner.

Flatbed scanners with a transparency illuminator work, but are generally not as sharp as a film scanner or a copy camera setup. I have an ancient Epson 2450 that I use for medium format film occasionally which does a passable job. I had a V700 in the past, which is higher resolution, but I found I just didn't like the scans out of it as much as I did the 2450 scans. I sold it to a friend who uses it quite often.

G

 

[x-ray]

There's a big difference in scanner performance. Now I'm going to ruffel feathers but don't take this personal. Epson flatbeds aren't very good for 35mm and 120. Resolution and dynamic range specs are highly inflated. Focus is off and require special adjustable carriers to get acceptable results. They take a lot of work to just get ok results. Really there are only a few high quality flatbed scanners that were produced. Were produced is the key phrase. The Fuji Finescan 2750 & 5000 and Lanovia Quattro and creo scitex Eversmart series were the tops along with one model Agfa/Linotype and Cezanne were the best of the best flatbeds. Unfortunately service and parts for all but the Eversmart are non existent and even the Eversmarts are difficult to get serviced and parts if you can get them are extremely expensive. These machines use proprietary software to run and run on old outdated operating systems. I had a Finescan 5000 and Lanovia Quattro. Even though I bought them from Fuji direct Fuji discontinued them a year or so after I bought them and I wound up having to get the 500 page service manual and buy another machine to scavenge parts from to keep it running. Fortunately I kept my Lanovia Quattro running for quite a few years and then sold it. The Eversmart are as good as the Fujis and there are one or two people that work on them but everything relating to them is super expensive. Also keep in mind the price of performance, the Lanovia Quattro and Eversmarts ran in the $50,000 range. The less expensive but still great like the Cezanne and Fuji 2750 were $25,000 twenty years ago.

The scans from these machines are amazing. These are pixel sharp and built for the peaviest professional prepress use. They are the best of the best.

Next in line and about equal are the Hasselblad Imacon machines. The older Flextight non FireWire machines have service issues now. I believe Hasselblad no longer has parts for everything. These run on SCSI and are good machines as long as they run.

I owned a more recent 343 which was great and runs on FireWire and current software. I now own an 848 which is as good as the top of the line flatbeds listed above. They run on current software and OS. The down side is it's a proprietary software and no other software will work. The other downside is they are expensive. A new X5 Hasselblad scanner will run $14,000 or more. I bought my 848 from Hasselblad reconditioned and it was $8,000.

Next down the line is the Nikon scanners and they're very good. Ive never owned one but everyone I know that has raves about them. If I didn't have an Imacon I'd get a Nikon scanner.

I forgot to mention drum scanners. There are a lot of used ones but most, like the Fuji machines, require a dongle to operate. A dongle is sort of an electronic key. Without it you have a boat anchor. My Fuji machines required a dongle specific to the OS I was using and required 2 - pass codes to unlock them. Nuts!

Most of the best drum scanners require a dongle and most often it's missing. Usually they were left attached to the computer that ran them and was trashed. Most run on OS9 or XP or even earlier machines.

Sadly the Epson flatbeds are way below the top scanners and are the only choice in flatbeds. If you've got the bucks you can buy a new Hasselblad for around $14,00 or a new Aztec drum scanner for around $75,000.

I'd suggest a late Nikon scanner. You can run them on current OS and can run them on vuescan. There are probably people and possibly Nikon still servicing them.

if you're going to sink a lot of money in excellent glass why scan it on a substandard scanner. Your images are only as good as the weakest link in the system.

 

[Dwig]

I plan to start scanning 35mm negs, mainly b&w for the first time and so l am on the lookout for a scanner, what would you recommend for someone new to scanning, thanks in advance for any help, what are the good classic scanners out there

The operative word here is "Beginner".

For someone new to scanning, I would highly recommend that you go with a new reasonably priced EPSON flatbed like the V500 or V600. Another reasonable route would be a classic "slide copier" setup using a good digital camera and macro lens.

The "classic" scanners out there will almost all pose hurdles. There will be software, OS, and hardware interface issues with most. For a beginner, these are likely significant challenges and can hinder learning the craft.

 

[f16sunshine]

What I take from all the scanner threads over the years is that:

great scans come from really expensive machines.

Really expenive machines are a pia to run and keep running

There are nearly no options between low end and hi end machines (there were options in the past like the Coolscan series etc... but those are no longer SW supported or repaiarable)


What does that mean for amateur photographers.
What is a great scan and why do I need one?

I think the question really should change to what is the need?
What is the primary final output for your scans?
Sharing electronically, small prints, large prints, ideally all but seldom all all the time.

I scan with a Epson V700 for Medium/large format and a Pakon 135plus for 35mm.
Both of these scanners provide what I consider to be good "preview" scans.
If I like an image I see and want to print....I send them out for a "pro" scan and printing.
For internet sharing and to preview image content, these lowly scanners do the job.

For a while I ran the Pakon for preview and then use the Nikon CS50 for print output.
It was good but not as good as sending it to Panda or another Lab who, has a scanning expert running a "full on" machine that I can't justify owning but sure don't mind paying to "rent".

My advice to the OP is to buy a good flatbed.
It can serve multiple purposes in your office.
Scan film, scan prints/reflective and documents, etc....
If you like scanning you can always go deeper if you want to.

Epson Scan Software is really easy to use for B+W. Getting color right is a different story.
In your position I would buy a V700/V800 and see how it goes.

Cheers!

 

[SaveKodak]

The Pacific Image XA is an excellent scanner, and I use mine regularly with Vuescan. It's very comparable to a Coolscan V that I used to use. The biggest challenge with any kind of scanning is the learning curve.

 

[shawn]

The Pacific Image XA is an excellent scanner, and I use mine regularly with Vuescan. It's very comparable to a Coolscan V that I used to use. The biggest challenge with any kind of scanning is the learning curve.

Those do look interesting. How well does it handle a full strip and how long does it take?

Shawn

 

[lxmike]

Thank you Col Sebastion et al, l am off work on Tuesday and l shall give my full attention to your knowledgeable replies over a couple of long relaxed coffees

 

[Godfrey]

What I take from all the scanner threads over the years is that:
great scans come from really expensive machines.
really expenive machines are a pia to run and keep running
There are nearly no options between low end and hi end machines (there were options in the past like the Coolscan series etc... but those are no longer SW supported or repaiarable)

Yes, the best scans come from expensive, built for the task machines. Particularly if your definition of "best scans" includes consistent, repeatable, reliable operation for many, many scans.

And yes, the midrange scanners of today don't exist anymore. Cheap stuff that does work exists but is often compromised. The midrange scanners of the past ... well, VueScan continues to "SW support" all of them, and runs on macOS, Windows, and Linux. There's also a version on iOS as well.

...
What does that mean for amateur photographers.
What is a great scan and why do I need one?
...

I basically agree. However, a 'scanning solution' as I mentioned earlier in this thread using a relatively inexpensive, used, Sony A7 body and a good macro lens can produce superb results that are the equal of if not better than the excellent mid-range scanners of the past. How consistent and reliable your results are depends on how well you work out the workflow and practice the technique.

Buying a decent flatbed scanner for the occasional scan for modest resolution results on the web or even the occasional print works and is relatively easy. But "best" is not in that picture.

I like to teach best practices, not "it works" practice. ;-)

G

 

[f16sunshine]

I don’t think the OP askd for best. He asked what would we suggest for a beginner scanner.
The a7 method is a good one but it’s not a “scanner”.
It’s a film copier just like the old film copier to copy slides.
Whether it’s best or not ,... It is not a scanner .