better negative scanner maybe?

S

shaaktiman

Guest
hi all,

I'm thinking of upgrading my scanning solution for 35mm. Right now I have an epson 4990 and I use it for both medium format and 35mm negs and chromes. Recently though, I've been shooting primarily 35mm and was wondering if it made sense to get the minolta dimage IV or the wet scanning equipment to improve my scans.

What do you guys think? What will give me the best 35mm film scan? The 4990 with wet mounting or a new dimage IV? Or is the 5400 such a dramatic leap in quality that I should just save up and eventually go there? (I mostly do B&W so ICE isn't an incentive.) Or is what I have already going to be roughly equivalent to the cheapo upgrades that I am considering?

thanks,

adam
 
I have a low end Dual Scan (1st model), only 2820dpi, and it's fine up to about 8x10 range. My flatbed (Microtek 5900) is also good for about the same but the biggest difference is speed and convenience. A dedicated 35mm film scanner is just so much faster and easier to work with.
 
If you're getting the quality of results you want, why switch? It all depends on how much 35mm you shoot as opposed to MF and your budget, I suppose.

For what it's worth, I have found the Dual Scan IV to be vastly superior to my Epson 2580 scanner for scanning 35mm negatives and slides.
 
I have a SD-IV and I like it although I am fighting dust all the time. While I do B&W most of the time, it would almost be worth it to me to get the IR based ICE system. With the SD-IV I can make really nice looking 11x14 on my Epson 2400, and I made some 13x19 that weren't bad.

Frankly, for the web, I don't think it matters. You have to scale it down so much, I think would think DPI shouldn't be a driving factor. Dust is also less when you are downsizing for the web. Stuff that will look like popcorn on an 11x14 won't even show on a 500ish pixel size web picture.

All the pics in my gallery are from a SD-IV, and I keep learning more everytime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom