Wallo
Member
This is going to be one of those threads that forum regulars may want to skip, since I'm sure these things are asked way too often and there isn't even any clear question in the end. But in case you have something to contribute, it would be very much appreaciated.
I've done a lot of googling and spent some time browsing this forum to figure out if my "shooting film, but going all digital" plan is doable. I guess the answer really is "it depends", but I want some new insight anyway. I have some film background, but have been shooting only digital for several years. Actually, I don't own a single film camera that works anymore. But I want to get a couple, for various reasons. The plan is not to go back to film, but to shoot both film and digital and keep the workflow on the computer. I'd get the film developed professionally and then do the scanning myself. For a once in a lifetime shot, sure I can get quality scanning done for me, but I want good, printable results from my own scanning, something that I can print in a book, put on the wall, you get the idea. If that is not doable within my budget, I have a lot more thinking to do.
The camera plan is to get one 35mm rangefinder (M mount; have the Epson RD-1 and can share the lenses) and one MF (6x6 or larger) rangefinder. I want to shoot mostly B&W with the smaller format and both colour and B&W with MF. Both print and slide, but I think I would be mostly scanning negatives. I know my camera gear will expand and change a lot during a year or three because I like trying different cameras, but the scanning solution should be good enough from day one.
My scanner budget is 1 000 euros (including software), and I would be more comfortable with about 500-700 since that leaves more for the cameras. My findings so far suggest that I could get a decent film scanner for 35mm, but I really need MF, too, since that's the main reason for considering film. The other option is a flatbed scanner, perhaps something from Epson. They seem good from what I have seen, but the difficult question is whether they are good enough. Should I go forward or rethink my options? The 1 000 euro budget is for a long-term solution (a few years), not for something that I would need to upgrade anytime soon (1-3 years).
I've done a lot of googling and spent some time browsing this forum to figure out if my "shooting film, but going all digital" plan is doable. I guess the answer really is "it depends", but I want some new insight anyway. I have some film background, but have been shooting only digital for several years. Actually, I don't own a single film camera that works anymore. But I want to get a couple, for various reasons. The plan is not to go back to film, but to shoot both film and digital and keep the workflow on the computer. I'd get the film developed professionally and then do the scanning myself. For a once in a lifetime shot, sure I can get quality scanning done for me, but I want good, printable results from my own scanning, something that I can print in a book, put on the wall, you get the idea. If that is not doable within my budget, I have a lot more thinking to do.
The camera plan is to get one 35mm rangefinder (M mount; have the Epson RD-1 and can share the lenses) and one MF (6x6 or larger) rangefinder. I want to shoot mostly B&W with the smaller format and both colour and B&W with MF. Both print and slide, but I think I would be mostly scanning negatives. I know my camera gear will expand and change a lot during a year or three because I like trying different cameras, but the scanning solution should be good enough from day one.
My scanner budget is 1 000 euros (including software), and I would be more comfortable with about 500-700 since that leaves more for the cameras. My findings so far suggest that I could get a decent film scanner for 35mm, but I really need MF, too, since that's the main reason for considering film. The other option is a flatbed scanner, perhaps something from Epson. They seem good from what I have seen, but the difficult question is whether they are good enough. Should I go forward or rethink my options? The 1 000 euro budget is for a long-term solution (a few years), not for something that I would need to upgrade anytime soon (1-3 years).
Riverman
Well-known
I'm in a similar quandry. I hear that the Epson V750 performs well for MF but doesn't really cut the mustard for 35mm. I'm shooting mostly 35mm at the moment but occasionally some 120. I'm leaning towards the Plustek 7500 for 35mm scanning which I'll do myself and then get individual Imacon scans of my 120 stuff when I print it at the lab - on a roll of 120 (6x6) I'd probably only print 2 or 3 shots anyway.
If you want 35mm and 120 dedicated glassless film scanning I think options are limited. Nikon 9000 or Microtek M1.
If you want 35mm and 120 dedicated glassless film scanning I think options are limited. Nikon 9000 or Microtek M1.
sanmich
Veteran
I think the best combo for that target would be a nikon for the 35, say a V or 4000, and add an epson V500 for MF.
johnny9fingers
Well-known
I ended up getting an Epson Perfection 4490 flatbed scanner for $125, and am happy with it so far. You can take a look at my "Last Weekend of Summer" set on Flicker by clicking on the link in my signature. Those pictures were shot with my Hexar AF on Porta 160NC film.
John
John
popeye
Established
Have you printed any of these? They look quite good on the screen.
agreenspan
Member
I just recently purchased an Epson V700. I too shoot 35mm and medium format, and the only dedicated scanner available now for both is over $2000. The epson is stellar on medium format. I am also thrilled with the 35mm scans. The largest I print is 13x19, and I too only need the scans for "putting on the wall, and in a book." The epson is more than good enough for that, and very versatile too. Only $494 U.S. at Amazon.com. I thought about getting the V750 for $200 more to squeeze that last ounce of quality out, but at my printing sizes, there will not be any discernable difference.
Stephen.
Stephen.
wintoid
Back to film
I picked up a Minolta dImage Scan Multi Pro for £1000, which is *very* capable, both with 35mm and medium format. The Nikon 9000 would be way over your budget, but the 8000 might be possible, and then there's a Polaroid Sprintscan or the Artixscan M1 (I think) which should both be easily under 1000 euros (but you have to wait to find them).
Depends how you feel about expensive secondhand scanners which are out of warranty.
Depends how you feel about expensive secondhand scanners which are out of warranty.
Wallo
Member
Thanks, Stephen and others, for your input. It has for some time been about choosing between the V700 and the V750. But the issue is mostly the 35mm quality. The V700 price point is certainly tempting since that might even allow buying a dedicated film scanner for 35mm, such as Plustek 7500 (?). Perhaps go with the V700 and later add a 35mm scanner if the quality I can get from the flatbed is not enough. Spending a couple hundred more if needed is much better than feeling a need to go beyond the original budget. That I really can't afford.
It seems there are some pretty good options available, although at times I have felt I could only get something "pretty okay" for my budget.
Wallo
Member
I'm very new to scanners, having never owned one myself, so expensive and out of warranty is not the best combination I can think of. But the ArtixScan M1 is very interesting. There are no units available locally, so I haven't been able to figure out a reasonable price for it.
johnny9fingers
Well-known
Not yet, but I plan on getting some prints done next week. I am very happy with the results I get with the Hexar, and I have no complaints about the Epson 4490 scanner......
aizan
Veteran
back when i was shopping for a scanner, i remember being very impressed by the minolta scan multi pro with scanhancer 5le. i ended up with a leafscan 45 because it could do 4x5, though.
Mablo
Well-known
Hi Wallo (Moi!). I started my scanning career with a Canon 8800 which is readily available in shops here for about 200EUR. It's quite good with MF and okayish with 35mm. Later I bought a used Nikon Coolscan for 35mm but I still use the Canon for MF and I'm happy with it.