Neare
Well-known
Price wise, scanners are a great investment if you're getting back into film. Even if you do darkroom printing - scanners are still effective for showing your work online.
When I started with film the end of last year, it took me about 3 lab CD's to realize that it would be foolish for me to pay that every time. I bought an epson v500 and have probably saved close to $1000 by now and that's only me shooting not much more than 1 roll a week. I'm happy.
When I started with film the end of last year, it took me about 3 lab CD's to realize that it would be foolish for me to pay that every time. I bought an epson v500 and have probably saved close to $1000 by now and that's only me shooting not much more than 1 roll a week. I'm happy.
tammons
Established
If you dont need more than 2800 dpi then buy a Minolta scan dual IV of fleabay.
They go for about $150-$200.
They go for about $150-$200.
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
Here is a question for all of you scanner gurus. What is a good dedicated film scanner that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? Say $500 or less?
benlees
Well-known
Just from the cost and the lack of quality alone from the lab scanning yourself will save you big bucks. Around here a roll of film scanned with low res jpg cost at least $5. You want high res and it is double the price. When you start scanning yourself you realize what a scam they are running!
The time it takes to scan is no more than the time you use going to and from the lab. The results will also be much better.
I've had my v700 for two years ($375) and have done over 1100 high res scans. I have saved at least $600 doing it myself.
The time it takes to scan is no more than the time you use going to and from the lab. The results will also be much better.
I've had my v700 for two years ($375) and have done over 1100 high res scans. I have saved at least $600 doing it myself.
Matus
Well-known
Well, under $500 is a bit tough call. Nikon Coolscan V does not fit (though you may get lucky). Then Then there is the Minolta Dimage Scan 5400 (versions I and II are very similar). Minolta should be very comparable to the Nikon quality wise. These were discontinued some 3 years ago. And then there are Scanners like Plustek or Reflecta (both have several different models). None of these are up to the Coolscan level as far as I know.
Your best starting place could be the following webpage - many reviews:
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/FilmscannerTestberichte.html
But be sure to think twice before you get a cheaper scanner that will save you $200 over a Coolscan. It is like getting a cheap tripod, if you know what I mean.
Your best starting place could be the following webpage - many reviews:
http://www.filmscanner.info/en/FilmscannerTestberichte.html
But be sure to think twice before you get a cheaper scanner that will save you $200 over a Coolscan. It is like getting a cheap tripod, if you know what I mean.
Proteus617
Established
I was very disappointed with the quality provided by my local lab> Negs were frequently dirty and/or mishandled. Jpeg scans were almost useless. Tiffs are expensive. Picked up a tank and reels on ebay for about $10. A cheap darkbag was less than $10. A used Epson 3170 was $40 shipped. It exhibits weird color shifts when it's not warmed up, but I only shoot B+W anyway. A bottle or Rodinal is cheap and lasts forever. Total cash in: less than $100. Yes, my scanner is far less than optimal, but I'm getting quality that surpasses what I was paying the pro lab $20 a roll for.
heatherselkie
Member
Thanks! I have some research to do. I don't know if my nearest shoppers drug mart has a photo lab. But, why would use North Coast labs? The prices are even higher than what I pay here and then I'd be paying shipping and extra for the US dollar. Unless they are mind blowing and I start producing images worth keeping I can't do it.
But yes, my local London drugs does not do a great job. Even a dedicated photolab in Vancouver did a bad job. I just got picked up some film and there were problems and I wonder what they are doing because the prints have a digital quality to them. That said I am really enjoying film and rangefinders and the shots are getting better. It's humbling working with a new kind of camera and not getting the gushworthy shots I've been used to. I plan on getting an slr so I can at least sometimes know what I am doing. Maybe someday I'll look into developing my own film. I'm fine with getting the negatives and photos to look at developed, but I want to be able to put keepers on the computer and work on them and post online. I have not tried slide film yet either.
I haven't gotten a medium format camera.....yet.
But yes, my local London drugs does not do a great job. Even a dedicated photolab in Vancouver did a bad job. I just got picked up some film and there were problems and I wonder what they are doing because the prints have a digital quality to them. That said I am really enjoying film and rangefinders and the shots are getting better. It's humbling working with a new kind of camera and not getting the gushworthy shots I've been used to. I plan on getting an slr so I can at least sometimes know what I am doing. Maybe someday I'll look into developing my own film. I'm fine with getting the negatives and photos to look at developed, but I want to be able to put keepers on the computer and work on them and post online. I have not tried slide film yet either.
I haven't gotten a medium format camera.....yet.
Steve M.
Veteran
Try the Kodak C41 B&W, or whatever C41 film you like, and take it to Walgreens. $6.30 where I live for 1 hour development and CD. Then I take it home, edit the shots in Photoshop, email any that may be interesting, and for keepers I send the files to Winkflash for 6.75x10 enlargements on matte paper for $1.49 ea. It doesn't get much cheaper or easier than that.
For medium format I still like home developing for real B&W and enlarger printing, but I don't like to do all of that w/ a tiny 35mm neg that I am not going to print very big anyway. The Winkflash (or any of the mail order labs) will give you an optical print that I prefer to an inkjet. It's not as razor sharp, but has that photographic look that I prefer. Just the difference between an image in a film emulsion, and a spray of ink on top of inkjet paper.
For medium format I still like home developing for real B&W and enlarger printing, but I don't like to do all of that w/ a tiny 35mm neg that I am not going to print very big anyway. The Winkflash (or any of the mail order labs) will give you an optical print that I prefer to an inkjet. It's not as razor sharp, but has that photographic look that I prefer. Just the difference between an image in a film emulsion, and a spray of ink on top of inkjet paper.
Last edited:
photogdave
Shops local
We don't have Walgreen's here.
photogdave
Shops local
Which lab did you use? I get my film developed at Custom Color but do my own scanning. I know that when I occasionally get prints made there they offer "digital" prints or more expensive traditional B&W prints.
The Lab is also good, but more expensive.
jan normandale
Film is the other way
I've got two scanners one for 135 (Konica Minolta Dual Scan IV) and one for 120/135 (Epson V500) I'd go for the Epson because they do a 'good enough and better than the lab' scan for 135 and 120. The KM DS IV is no longer made and support is tough. Used they go for the price of the V500 on sale at Future Shop. Keep an eye out for electronics dealers to put that model on sale. A friend picked up a V500 last year for $150.00 on a promo sale from Future Shop. Available by 'postal delivery only' no instore sales! Hard to beat that deal.
good luck.
good luck.
JPSuisse
Well-known
Hi Heather
After I picked up my MP and 50 Lux about 3 years ago. I knew the next step had to be a film scanner (Nikon 5000). I must admit that learning to scan and manage EXIF data with EXIF Tool was a painful process.
Scanning is such an art. But, I have it under control now. And, for chromes especially, I can literally put the roll into the scanner now, set it up (locking the scanner exposure) and then go wash dishes while I get great hi rez scans!
For me, it's worth it to control my scanning. I found my negatives would just scratched when I gave my film out. Furthermore, you have to develop B&W yourself to get the quality consistent. (Of course, films like 400CN that can be developed as color negativ film are a great fall back until you learn to develop.)
It's easy to control all the variables of scanning once you realize what they are. I clean the bathroom, develop the film, hang it over night, throw it in the scanner in the morning. No scratches, no dust, great quality.
Good luck.
Cheers,
JP
After I picked up my MP and 50 Lux about 3 years ago. I knew the next step had to be a film scanner (Nikon 5000). I must admit that learning to scan and manage EXIF data with EXIF Tool was a painful process.
Scanning is such an art. But, I have it under control now. And, for chromes especially, I can literally put the roll into the scanner now, set it up (locking the scanner exposure) and then go wash dishes while I get great hi rez scans!
For me, it's worth it to control my scanning. I found my negatives would just scratched when I gave my film out. Furthermore, you have to develop B&W yourself to get the quality consistent. (Of course, films like 400CN that can be developed as color negativ film are a great fall back until you learn to develop.)
It's easy to control all the variables of scanning once you realize what they are. I clean the bathroom, develop the film, hang it over night, throw it in the scanner in the morning. No scratches, no dust, great quality.
Good luck.
Cheers,
JP
drec
Rangeflounder
There is the Plustek 7500i SE for around $400. It comes with Silverfast software. The more expensive 7500i AI comes with better Silverfast software. It's got good enough resolution, if I remember, to more than compete with the Minolta Scan Dual IV, but it definitely isn't a Nikon 9000 or a Minolta 5400.
ederek
Well-known
heatherselkie - youre off to a good start with your research!
First, get a good loupe and some sort of light table.
Scanner - yes, it is worth it to get a scanner. The suggestions here are good. Future expansion to medium format may drive your choice (did mine, and now 2 years later just getting ready to go that route with large format).
Processing - if youre happy with the negs youre getting, stick with that for now. Like others said, developing at home can be low cost, fun to do (especially when you first pull the negs from the spool - exciting!) and offer better quality and control.
dSLR - you seem to want a digital slr to make your photography better (knowing what youre doing via instant feedback). That can be helpful but it may even slow down progress in the end.
What part of the rangefinder experience is the most challenging for you, exposure, focus, composition, handling and speed of use..?
What is a 'gushworthy' image for you? Any examples?
Good luck!
First, get a good loupe and some sort of light table.
Scanner - yes, it is worth it to get a scanner. The suggestions here are good. Future expansion to medium format may drive your choice (did mine, and now 2 years later just getting ready to go that route with large format).
Processing - if youre happy with the negs youre getting, stick with that for now. Like others said, developing at home can be low cost, fun to do (especially when you first pull the negs from the spool - exciting!) and offer better quality and control.
dSLR - you seem to want a digital slr to make your photography better (knowing what youre doing via instant feedback). That can be helpful but it may even slow down progress in the end.
What part of the rangefinder experience is the most challenging for you, exposure, focus, composition, handling and speed of use..?
What is a 'gushworthy' image for you? Any examples?
Good luck!
JohnL
Very confused
If you intend to get serious about scanning film, get a dedicated film scanner (eg Nikon 5000 for 35mm). They tend to be more expensive, but results are better.
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
This has been my (admittedly limited) experience, as well. I think for MF and large negatives, an Epson v700 works remarkably. I haven't used mine for 35mm negatives, as I have access to a Nikon dedicated 35mm film scanner -- it's almost *too* sharp, sometimes.
You're being given good advice too, on home film development. It's essential not only for economics but also truly getting to know the process, and your images. It's also quite easy and a terrific way to gain control over your images.
patois
Established
Scanning film takes forever on my epson but the results I get are way better than what I see from my local mini labs.
Damaso
Photojournalist
If you plan on shooting a lot of film it is worth it in the long run.
David_Manning
Well-known
Bang for the buck, the best 35mm film scanner (dedicated) is the Plustek 7600i. It is so much sharper than my previous Epson flatbed (4990), that the problem now is seeing too much grain. It's an okay problem to have 
I bought mine from Adorama, for about $350 or so, and I'm very happy with it. I just scanned a b&w 35mm negative to 7200dpi (that's it's max, and interpolated up a bit) and printed at 20x30 at 240dpi and it looks incredible...I couldn't have gotten an optical print of the same size and quality from 35mm.
I bought mine from Adorama, for about $350 or so, and I'm very happy with it. I just scanned a b&w 35mm negative to 7200dpi (that's it's max, and interpolated up a bit) and printed at 20x30 at 240dpi and it looks incredible...I couldn't have gotten an optical print of the same size and quality from 35mm.