Scanner Decisions

[RFOBD]

Hello all,

I'm sure questions like this have been asked a million times, so please forgive me for asking something similar (I have read over old threads).

I have about $150 budget for an inexpensive film scanner. I might print out a 4x6 or 5x7 or maybe an occasional 8x10 with the scans, but the main purpose is for viewing the images on my computer and on the web.

I have read such praise over the Epson 4490 and I was set on a refurb of that from Epson, but then saw that they no longer have it on their website. It appears I just missed all the refurbs. I'm still willing to pay the $150 for the 4490 from Epson because, although not quite the deal as when they were $92 refurbished, it appears to be the best thing for the price. Then I noticed that I can get the Canon Canoscan 8800F for about the same price.

Does anyone happen to have experience with both of these scanners? Does anyone have any thoughts on the difference between the two?

I'm not expecting anything spectacular from either scanner, but it kills me to fork over $3.00 per roll of film to the local lab to have the pictures on a CD when I could do it myself and have more flexibility.

 

[RFOBD]

Oh and I'll be scanning only 35mm film.

 

[Pherdinand]

only 35mm, then buy a dedicated 35mm film scanner. Less bulky, better quality. It's easy.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I'm hugely enjoying the $200 Epson V500. It's a flatbed scanner.

 

[RFOBD]

Yeah, I would love to get a dedicated film scanner but I don't know of any decent quality ones in my budget ($200 is pushing it).

I also wouldn't want to rule out the possibility of scanning 120.

 

[ampguy]

I'm pleased with the V100 for film, documents and the odd old photo.

 

[bhop73]

I have an Epson 4490. I like it.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bhop73/sets/72157604468568939/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bhop73/sets/72157604198989598/

 

[RFOBD]

Thank you everyone for your replies.

I've noticed that the Canon 8800F is a competitor for the V500. They both used LED so there is little warm-up time, but the 8800F is about $30 less than the V500 (a pretty big deal for a college student).

Since right now the main thing I will be scanning is 35mm film, would the 8800F be a better choice? Does anyone have any experience with it?

 

[Bob Michaels]

With $150 and some patience, you can find a good used 35mm film scanner. Just keep watching all the used equipment sites.

There has not been large improvement in scanning equipment. You will find that a 5-6 year old 35mm film scanner is just about as good as a new one. And that older 35mm film scanner will be in a league that even the newest flatbeds cannot approach.

But your comment sort of sounds like you have bought into the siren of the current flatbed scanners. If that is the case, but the best Epson refurb they are offering. Those are consistently the best deals around.

 

[Scarpia]

I have a Canon 8600F and it certainly is capable of making good prints at the sizes you mention. The 8800 uses LEDs but otherwise is virtually the same as the 8600F. According to what I read on this forum the Canons are less tempermental than the Epsons. Google "Stockholm Reviews" for an excellent review of both Canons. Good luck
Kurt M.
]Sorry ! Its Stockholmviews.com

 

[briandaly]

I have the 8800F. I've scanned some C41 negatives and the scans compare favourably with those from the lab. Also, if you decide to shoot medium format, you can use this scanner.
Elements 5.0 and Silverfast are included, although I find Canon's own software easiest to use.

 

[kevin m]

I'm selling a Minolta Dual Scan III in the classifieds that does a better job than what I've seen from flatbed scanners. Heck, sometimes I can't tell the difference between the files I scan with it and the Nikon Coolscan 5000.

 

[RFOBD]

But your comment sort of sounds like you have bought into the siren of the current flatbed scanners. If that is the case, but the best Epson refurb they are offering. Those are consistently the best deals around.

Oh no, I said I would love a dedicated scanner but didn't think I could find one in my budget. This also limits me to 35mm scanning, which wouldn't be terrible if the scans are of a much better quality. Do you have any recommendations on what dedicated scanners to keep an eye out for that would be in my budget?

Scarpia and briandaly, thank you both for the information. I will look into that review site.

 

[RFOBD]

I'm selling a Minolta Dual Scan III in the classifieds that does a better job than what I've seen from flatbed scanners. Heck, sometimes I can't tell the difference between the files I scan with it and the Nikon Coolscan 5000.

Do you happen to have a link to the listing?

 

[Bob Michaels]

Oh no, I said I would love a dedicated scanner but didn't think I could find one in my budget. This also limits me to 35mm scanning, which wouldn't be terrible if the scans are of a much better quality. Do you have any recommendations on what dedicated scanners to keep an eye out for that would be in my budget?

See Kevin M's post about the Minolta ScanDual III he has listed. I did not check the price he is asking but I'd think that is the sort of thing you'd be looking for. I had a ScanDual II and consider it to be super.

 

[marke]

plustek OpticFilm 7200