Which scanner will scan film easly & well

S

splaaash

Established
Local time
6:57 PM
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
177
In the past i bought a canon i90 scanner 190€:eek: some years ago.It came with a film clamp and special light---BUT i had to light EACH frame:eek:
To scan six frames took half an hour or more when the film refused to sit in the guide..clamp

Then i used a slide copier slow and not great result

In the end i put the film in strips on the scanner and made images from the 35mm size copy...fast but not good

For years ive been taking my film to the local shop to print on their copier the size of a small car...:eek: or shops that send it to Germany to be copied with about a week delay

Now were well into the 20centuary is there at last a way to scan my film to digital file to print via my printer
 
Two small scanners that will eat a whole roll of film unattended are the Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED and the Pakon F135 Plus. The Nikon gives great quality scans and runs on modern operating systems via VueScan. But it's expensive. The Pakon is cheaper and much faster but the resolution is only 3000x2000 and you need a windows XP computer to run the software. (XP on a virtual machine on a modern OS also works.)

No current-production consumer-level scanners do this, I don't think.
 
I have an Epson V200 which i bought in a car boot sale for £4. For this money, it is the best scanner ever :)
I have heard very good things about the Epson Perfection V550 though. You might want to check that out....
 
I have been scanning film since about 1996 with a number of different scanners... Nowadays I have two film scanners: Nikon Coolscan V ED and Super Coolscan 9000 ED.

The Coolscan V and SA-21 film carrier allows scanning 35mm film in six frame long strips as a batch and is quick. These are currently selling on Ebay for prices in the $800 to $400 range, and are one of the best dedicated 35mm film scanners ever made.

The Super Coolscan 9000 is a medium format film scanner. With the 35mm film carrier fitted, it can handle two 6 frame strips of 35mm at a time, which can be scanned as a batch job. It has the same resolution as the Coolscan V but produces different results due to a very different illumination system—kind of like the difference between a condenser enlarger head (Coolscan V) and a diffusor enlarger head (Super Coolscan 9000). These have now become very pricey indeed, ranging on average from $3000+ to about $2300. An excellent scanner.

For the occasional film to digital capture nowadays, though, I tend to use a copy stand set up (camera, macro-capable lens, copy stand, negative holding fixture, and a flat panel light box). If you make a good negative fixture, you can efficiently capture a lot of negatives or slides very quickly this way into high-resolution raw files with excellent quality.

G
 
Epson v500. Using its software in auto. Does 1800 dpi or so. Good for 8х10 prints.
 
This cheap Wolverine scanner has effectively replaced my flatbed:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1018538-REG/wolverine_f2d20super_super_f2d_4_in_1_film.html

It uses a 20 MP sensor and takes an image of each frame, saves to an SD card. Requires only a couple seconds for each image. It is not automatic, but you can thread a whole roll through it and use the LCD preview to select the frames you want.

It produces results superior to my Canon 9000 scanner (which I realize is not the highest grade machine). The only caveat - the sensor is obviously 'repurposed' and introduces a slight crop at the left and right edges of the frame. This is an irritation, but so far the convenience of using this little box trumps that.

Randy
 
So much choice

The Wolverine scanner looks good as long as i develop each film and scan rather than put off developing then develop a batch of five or six films----even two or three films and there are a hundred frames to scan
one after the other,and repeated if one fails:eek: But thats the same which ever scanner is used

The epson is im sure good but their printers and scanners have all been VERY expensive and more to run:eek: And work in a way that gets them more profit than customer satisfaction

It looks as if using an enlarger regularly would still be far faster.with pre mixed chemicals i could print 20/30 good prints in the time it would take to scan three films??

Ill have a look on ebay for a Wolverine scanner could be interesting---im sure i saw one for sale at Carffour years ago at 70€ but im sure the copy rate was quite slow
 
splaaash said:
The epson is im sure good but their printers and scanners have all been VERY expensive and more to run:eek: And work in a way that gets them more profit than customer satisfaction
Click to expand...

That isn't true. I have a V500, it costs $250 (then), the electricity and the time. I'm satisfied with it.
 
Godfrey said:
The Super Coolscan 9000 . . . has the same resolution as the Coolscan V but produces different results due to a very different illumination system—kind of like the difference between a condenser enlarger head (Coolscan V) and a diffusor enlarger head (Super Coolscan 9000). These have now become very pricey indeed, ranging on average from $3000+ to about $2300. An excellent scanner.
Click to expand...

Have to agree with Godfrey on this. I've had the Coolscan 9000, the Coolscan 5000, and the Coolscan III. The Coolscan III had a device that would scan a whole roll of 35mm film, but it usually scratched the negatives. It also did a poor job with Black & White. The Coolscan 5000 did a better job with Black & White, but still not nearly as nice as the Coolscan 9000, but the 5000 I had also had a device that allowed you to scan a full roll of 35mm (without scratching the negs). The Coolscan III broke on me, and I sold the Coolscan 5000 because I mostly scan Black & White. I've kept the Coolscan 9000.

The "diffusion enlarger" Coolscan 9000 does simply beautiful Black & White scans, but it is expensive, and it is slow.
 
The Kodak F135 id AMAZING and ive never seen or heard of them:(:(

OHHH:eek: 200€ for a broken one or 300€ for one "that works no garentee":eek:
 
The Wolverine scanner dose not exist in europe

Choice from 100s in the USA but no shipping to europe..import costs a fortune

What EUROPEAN film scanner can i look for:eek:
 
:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

NikonCoolscan 9000 from 4600€-------4600€--------46000€

SECOND HAND -----USED ----HOPE IT WORKS AS IT SHOULD:eek::eek:

A good Besseler 23 costs 250€ in new condition

Besseler 45M in good working condition 50€

Focomat WITH Focotar 60€:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

I seem to remember looking at scanners at the end of the 19th Century when they were the same price
Now almost half way through the 20th Century they all cost a fortune even when broken
 
splaaash said:
...
I seem to remember looking at scanners at the end of the 19th Century when they were the same price
Now almost half way through the 20th Century they all cost a fortune even when broken
Click to expand...

BTW, 1901->2000 = the 20th century
2001-3000 = the 21st century
and we're slightly less than 15% of the way into the 21st century at present; no where near "almost half way through".

Some desirable scanners are no longer made and, as a result, are a bit scarce. That scarcity combined with the desirability can add up to higher prices.

In the end, you'll find that there is no easy way to get excellent scans. With the right scanner and software combo you might find an easy way to get adequate scans. Good scans will always involve a bit of work and excellent scans require premium equipment and a lot of work.
 
If you want the best of the best, an Hasselblad Flextight is what you want. At €12000,- it might be slightly over your budget. And no, €12000,- is no typo, it really is twelve thousand euros....

You might be interested in these reviews of filmscanners. Looking at your original post, you might be interested in the Reflecta RPS 10M as it features both a single slide slot for scanning one slide at a time, as well as a means to automatically load and batch scan 35mm film strips and 35mm roll films. At €599,- at scandig.de it is within the realm of affordable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom