Wolverine F2D-14 - surprisingly good

[mfunnell]

For reasons set out in this thread I've just today acquired a Wolverine F2D-14 scanner. (That link is to Adorama where I bought it. That's not an endorsement, as such, but they've always done well by me.)

I wasn't expecting much - it was a $99 (+postage combined with other items) bet that it would be good enough for at least web images. The idea being to have it with me "on the road" where my other, much more expensive, scanners would fear to tread.

Despite these low expectations, I have to say that I'm much more impressed than I expected.

Here's a photo of the scanner (trying to show just how small it is):


And some examples of it's output (all from a test roll of FP4+ shot at box speed with an Olympus P&S and developed in LC29 1+29 for 12 minutes):







And here's a 100% crop (unsharpened) from that last photo, showing the detail the scanner can produce:


Not too shabby!

Sure it's 8-bit JPEG output. It seems a bit, well, "agricultural" in use (jiggling the negative carrier around and such). It's unlikely to challenge my Nikon 5000ED if scanning for maximum quality in large sized prints (though I will check, when I'm next home and have the opportunity to do a direct comparison). But it is small, it's quick to use (much quicker than my more expensive scanners) and produces pretty decent detail to my eye. I haven't checked it with slides or colour negatives. But my main purpose was to get "good enough" output from self-developed B&W while on the road.

I think I won my $99 bet.

...Mike

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

thanks much! any chance you can upload a full jpg of any of the samples ?

thanks!

 

[mfunnell]

thanks much! any chance you can upload a full jpg of any of the samples ?

thanks!

I just have. See:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mfunnell/sets/72157631774509984/

Those are the shots from my test roll I chose to do something with (if only for test purposes).

Note that these are not untouched. Quoting from one of the uploads:

Note that these are not "raw" scans. They've been inverted (they came upside down from the scanner) and had white and black point set in Photoshop and some have had contrast mildly tweaked using the curves tool in Photoshop. A couple have been cropped (slightly) and straightened. I've cleaned up the occasional spot of dust scanned from the negatives, as well.

I have uploaded one photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mfunnell/8089840173

in that set which has not been "touched" as an example. That one is just as it came from the scanner. I couldn't be arsed (as it were) uploading any more. I chose that one shot because it: (a) uses the closest approximation I have to an ISO standard test cat; and (b) I vaguely recall I "touched" this more than the others.

...Mike

 

[rbelyell]

thanks! this looks like a winner. nothing but great reviews all over the net! do you know if theres anything like this for medium format, esp 6x6?

i only wish it would scan my xpan negatives! 🙂
tony

 

[bugmenot]

Essentially, it is a 14mp CCD sensor with a lens that can capture the negatives. Heck, it even has live view. 😀 Quite simple, but the package as a whole makes it worthwhile.

This is like digitizing your images with a P&S camera, but setting it up yourself might be more trouble than it's worth.

BTW, this scanner is only $80 on B&H until the end of the year ...

 

[MarylandBill]

Thanks for the review.

Its a shame that it only supports jpegs. Still, for posting images to the web, small prints, etc., it ought to be ok for someone looking to get into scanning fairly cheaply (i.e., me!). And if there are any images I really want high quality from, I can send those out to a lab.

--
Bill

 

[hipsterdufus]

Looking through the full-size examples, not bad at all! Cheap enough to almost buy as a backup to my Plustek 7300. Thanks for posting!

 

[mfunnell]

Looking through the full-size examples, not bad at all! Cheap enough to almost buy as a backup to my Plustek 7300. Thanks for posting!

Glad you found it helpful or at least vaguely interesting.

...Mike

 

[Stuart John]

Thanks, this could be a good cheap alternative to a flatbed for 35mm.

 

[grapejohnson]

much thanks for putting this up here. seeing your tiny lab in the kitchenware made me feel very relieved about traveling.

 

[funkydog]

Hey thanks for posting. I wondered about these things. Looks like I might get one too. The price can't be beat.

Does the scanner have the option to save output as scanned without auto-correction tone/contrast presets being applied?

 

[mfunnell]

Does the scanner have the option to save output as scanned without auto-correction tone/contrast presets being applied?

Well, it pretty much doesn't have any other option. Understand that this isn't anything overly fancy: it scans stand-alone, with no computer involvement. No software, no driver, no computer involved in the scanning process, as such. (Alternatively, you might say that there is no such option: if it's applying any tone curves etc. then that's entirely opaque to you; it's just a black - well, green - box as far as adjustments are concerned.)

You position the negative (or slide, but I haven't done that) by rattling it around 'till it seems roughly right on the little screen (when I described operation as "a bit agricultural" I meant it). You pause to allow the device to auto-focus (that's what it <i>seems</i> to be doing, anyway) then press the button. That "scans" (I think it really "photographs"). If you like what you see on the screen you push a button to save it to the SD card (or it's rather small internal memory, if you don't have an SD card). That's it, really. The only adjustment you can make is +/- EV compensation (in half-stops, if I recall correctly) before pressing the scan button.

Once you're done scanning you can change the mode of the device to talk to a computer, at which point it stops being a scanner and becomes a card reader for the SD card and internal memory (or you can do what I do, and pull the SD card out and read it, without the Wolverine device, in your favourite card reader).

With just a little bit more experience I might also note that the limiitations of the scanner are most noticable when there's a high exposure range to be scanned (ie. a lot of stops between white and black) in the scene on the negative (note: I've only scanned self-developed B&W). I've thought of trying the exposure compensation feature and using some kind of HDR-like technique to get a better (or, at least, longer) range of tones. I've also thought of trying to scan B&W as if it were a colour negative then working with the separate RGB values.

But I haven't tried any of that yet, and have no idea if either thought has any merit. I'll try to report back if I come up with any techniques that seem to help.

...Mike

 

[funkydog]

Thanks for the write up. It's good to know that the machine is pretty basic. I've read user opinions of sub-$100 scanners (not sure about this exact model) where the device tries to outsmart the photographer by applying AWB and Auto-Curves whether or not the picture needs it.

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

urggg.... this item and the 20mb version is out of stock...