Best Film Scanner for under $500? Under $1000?

S

sheins1928

Newbie
Local time
12:39 AM
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Messages
9
Hi RFF! I'm looking to purchase a scanner this winter to scan my own negatives, instead of relying on my nearby lab. I realize the sky is basically the limit when it comes to resolution options and everyone's got a different approach, so here's my situation...

---I currently get my film processed and scanned at Chelsea Photo Services in NYC. They charge $8 for processing a roll of either 35mm or 120mm in C-41 (About 70% of what I shoot is Portra).

---Charge for scanning that yields 6MB negatives is $24. 18MB negatives is $28, and 30MB negs is a cool $40.

--I usually go with the 6MB option for economy's sake and the fact that most of my film work just gets posted online to social media for friends and family to check out. That means all told, getting a roll out of the canister and onto my HD costs $32 plus tax. That being said, I am definitely compromising what I really would prefer in terms of resolution quality.

I began thinking about the idea of doing my own scans when I got back these two images from Chelsea Photo's lab. They were shot back to back on the same roll, same camera, same spot (in Oran, Algeria), just a couple minutes apart. The difference in tint astonished me and made me think that I might be better off scanning on my own and taking full control of how my negatives come out.


46804334_10156891478779122_7611015325089267712_o.jpg


46656713_10156891478809122_8319312233142157312_o.jpg


So the question is a simple one--what would you all say is my best home scanner option for 35mm + 120mm, both in the $1-500 range, and $500-1000 range?

Thanks all!
 
Flatbed Epson for 120 and Plustek for 135 will be well under 1K in total. They are the best because they are sold new and supported by current OS on current PC.

Most likely someone will toss in Nikon scanners and lens adapters. Check Nikon 120 film scanner prices and Nikon lens adapter doesn't seems to have 120 film frame.
But here is some DIY version of scanning with digital cameras available. Gives very pleasing results as long as film is clean.
 
On the cheap end a old Epson 4490 is still a capable machine.

You could easily get the scanner and 120 holder for around 100$

I still have mine and prefer it to my newer Epson V300.

Have not had any compatibility issues with it either, just plug and play.


IMHO I would start here.
 
I think most people go for the Epson flatbed scanners for 120 film. A somewhat tedious process but it gets easier.

For 35mm film I wouldn't touch a scanner that doesn't eat a whole roll in one go. At one point it felt like I was spending more time scanning than shooting.

Save up for a Pakon F135 or better yet a Noritsu LS-600.
 
B-9 said:
On the cheap end a old Epson 4490 is still a capable machine.

You could easily get the scanner and 120 holder for around 100$

I still have mine and prefer it to my newer Epson V300.

Have not had any compatibility issues with it either, just plug and play.


IMHO I would start here.
Click to expand...

My 4490 died recently and I'm looking at a V550 for medium format.
 
I recommend getting an Epson V750 or V850.
Done correctly, the V750 is capable of very good scans even with 35mm. I have a V750 and a Nikon Coolscan V, and I still use the V750 for most of my 35mm scanning. I have made 12x18 prints from 35mm scans that came from the V750 and, while that's definitely pushing the limits of what the scanner is capable, the prints came out quite well.
I find that Epson software allows for the most control of output too.
 
Those Plusteks for 35mm are a hassle to use and do emphasize grain. I have seen very good results from Epson flatbeds. Not very good when zoomed in at pixel level but that´s not how anyone presents images on the web.

Flatbeds also can batch scan several strips of film at once which is a big plus. I second what Fjäll wrote above: At one point it felt like he was spending more time scanning than shooting. This is what you want to avoid.
 
I'm extremely happy with my Plustek 8100 and vuescan. Gives very high quality results unlike my old Epson V550 (for 35mm) and I prefer the color I get from it over the old Noritsu scans I was getting back from the lab. Vuescan gives very nice color, but the best results I get are from Photoshop Actions by Adrian Gabor.
 
"I use an old Konica Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV under Vuescan and I'm happy with it."

I have a friend who has used this scanner for years with great satisfaction. It is not too hard to find and fairly inexpensive. I use a Minolta Scan Elite 5400II, which is about as good as it gets short of drum scans. Both of these are limited to 35mm. On a limited budget, I think you can get by fine with a flatbed (Epson) so long as you are not making huge enlargements.
 
Another happy user of a Minolta Scan Dual III for my 35mm film. This is an autofocus scanner, and the results are IME superior to the (non-autofocus) Plustek 8100 I briefly tested. I bought the Minolta new about 15 years ago, still going strong and works fine under Windows 7/10 using Vuescan.

For medium format I use an Epson V550 with very good (to me) results.
 
Bille said:
There is another contender flying under the radar most of the time. Its the Pacific Image PrimeFilm XE aka Reflecta ProScan 10T.
Click to expand...

Then better directly the 10M which scans a whole roll at once (although extremly slow), problem is to find one which works flawlessly, Pacific Image has in my experience a huge problem with quality control. I'm still waiting for some serious tests of the new Pacific Image Powerfilm which scans 10 film stripes at one.

Juergen
 
mod2001 said:
Then better directly the 10M which scans a whole roll at once (although extremly slow), problem is to find one which works flawlessly
Click to expand...

"better directly" and "extremely slow" and "problem(atic") ... now what? The 10T looks good, sounds reasonably quick and doesnt have potential issues with the motorized feed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom