Primefilm 1800

[Stephanie Brim]

We all know that I'm broke, but I really do need a scanner. I'm thinking that this may be a cheap way to go. Does anyone have one? I really only need it for scanning for web use...I'm not needing it for print use. I figure that the resolution will be plenty. Not what I'd like, really (which is about 1000dpi more), but plenty anyway. I'll be using it most of the time to scan black and white film and color slides.

Any other suggestions for a scanner (sub-$100 if possible) would be nice, too. USB is kind of a must, though...this Mac is SCSI-ready, but I don't have a card IIRC.

 

[Solinar]

Stephanie, this is info is anecdotal. I have heard and read that the Primefilm 1800 doesn't hold up well under. In other words, it is easy to break.

If all you are only scanning for the web, try getting the Canoscan 8400F. It's a flat bed scanner that works well when negs are perfectly exposed. It has a built-in light in the top cover. I use one for my medium format work. I've had it for a year and haven't had a lick of trouble. The Canon supplied software is a bit too basic, but it works.

You can get this one from http://newegg.com for $126.50, shipped.

If it was my money, I would wait until I had $225, which is approximately what the Minolta Dual Scan IV costs. I love this scanner.

 

[markinlondon]

Stephanie, I used a Primefilm 1800 for about two weeks before caving in and buying a better scanner. This is the model that's also sold as a Microtek 35. It never managed to produce the same result twice from the same negative so I would have to scan several times tweaking in the driver as I went to get any sort of usable result. That along with the fact it only scans fit to print about 7x5 made me swallow my losses and buy a much better Canon FS2710. I'd advise going secondhand, the Minolta Dual Scans have a good rep.

I don't have a lot of experience of film scanners, but this one almost put me off completely. Incidentally, I have now given up scanning film at all, preferring to print traditionally and then scan prints.

Mark

 

[Socke]

A friend of mine bought one version of the primefilm in 2002, it hasn't seen much use! My very old Agfa Snapscan 1236 flatbed with the transparency addon is much better!
After I tried the Primefilm I bought a used Canon FS2710 which is fine for my purposes and works well with vuescan on a Windows Notebook and a 500MHz Titanium Powerbook.
I payed something around 150 Euro for the scanner and an Adaptec PCMCIA SCSI card which is much better than hooking up a scanner to the slooooooow USB 1.1 ports my computers have.

A USB 2 card is not cheaper than a SCSI card and scanners with firewire are much more expensive than those with USB 2. So it was an easy decision.

I'd go for an old Nikon Coolscan or Canon with around 2700 dpi and a SCSI card again.

 

[markinlondon]

Wow, Socke, there's an echo in here 🙂

Second the SCSI option, the Canon scanner was bundled with an Adaptec card, much quicker.

Mark

 

[jlw]

Just to echo the general condemnation of the Primefilm 1800 -- I don't know anything about this particular model, but I know the guts of it are made by a company called PIE (Pacific Imaging Electronics) and I once owned a Kodak-branded scanner which also was made by PIE.

The hardware of this scanner was a bit flimsy but otherwise not too awful. The PIE driver software, however, was a frustrating, crash-prone nightmare.

Buying a scanner is like buying an enlarger or a tripod -- you'll be money ahead by waiting a bit and then buying a good one that will last you a while, rather than buying a cheap one you know you'll have to replace shortly.

 

[Nikon Bob]

If you have a flatbed scanner why not scan prints if it is only for web use and when you are ready cash wise then get a good dedicated film scanner. Some flat beds come with adaptors to hold slides and negs for scanning so there is that option too. I have used a couple of HP scanners and they seem to be OK and the bundled software is easy to use.

Bob

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Okay. I know what I'm going for now. Thanks guys. 😀