Film scanners

For a split second I managed to catch the searchfunction in a good mood and it returned this thread that might be of use in your quest for a scanner. This is just one of many threads on this subject - just keep searching and ye shall find.

Sounds like there's plenty to scan. So speed is vital (trust me) and that rules out the only Canon near your price range - the FS4000US. Honestly, for £300 your only choice IMO is the Konica Minolta Dual Scan 4. With 3200 dpi it's quite sufficient - and fast (don't worry about software). But for £450 you could get a Nikon Coolscan LS50ED (my choice)... Though these two are fast only if your PC supports USB 2.0... If it doesn't, you'll have to sacrifice either your time and nerves or the resolution of the scans – or £800 for Nikon's LS5000 with IEEE 1394 aka Firewire

Johan

Patrick,
That link seems to be a little bit broken - it only works if you copy it and paste it into the browser url window! The DNS seems to choke whilst trying to resolve 9950F ....

The compared to... page says it all: flatbeds are still a waste of money for film scanning.

- - - - -

"the recognition of facts is the beginning of all wisdom."

- J. K. Paasikivi -

The reviewer is clearly impressed with it and considers it more than adequate for large format film scanning, but he seems less convinced with its 35mm capabilities. Perhaps we still have to wait a little longer for the truly all-purpose film/flatbed scanner.

quote:

---

flatbed scans prints, 120 and 4x5 films.

---

sure, but it scans only prints well. Not many people use larger format film, and of those who do, a fraction would opt for a sub £300 flatbed to scan their material. And Nick is looking for a 35mm scanner. OK, if you want to scan film just to look at on screen at low resolution, sure, you can get a flatbed. But if you want to produce prints bigger than 10x15cm, forget it. The Minolta (around £230 or even less) is the better choice, get it and any basic £100 flatbed for prints and other reflective stuff. I have a £1000+ flatbed with a dedicated plate for scanning of transparent material and the Nikon CS 50 (£400) blows it to bits. The Flatbed is fantastic for reflective material, good for big format film, reasonable for 35mm negatives, but slides loose edge sharpness, just like on the scans with the 9950. Did you really look at these samples?

I'd say the Nikon is about 500% better (and can do much better than this sample shows), for my needs at least - I do big prints - my Nikon makes my rangefinder a digital camera.

But if recognising what's in the picture is enough, sure, get the 9950 or similar, I'm not at all saying it would be useless. But even if I got one for free it wouldn't give me the results I want. But that's me, Nick will make his own choice.

I'll just put in one set of comments and let this rest for my part. A) The Minolta DS4 gives practically just as sharp and detailed images as the Nikon, only at lower resolution (so you can't go much bigger than A4 for top quality prints). B) It's also fast. If Nick has hundreds/thousands of images to scan, speed is vital and he can honestly save days or weeks with a Minolta compared to any flatbed like the 9950. And I don't think that will change in the near future. C) What those images don't tell, is that where film scanners really excell compared to flatbeds is their ability to catch detail in both darkest shadows and highlights. D) Regarding my flatbed, it is still in production, professional scanners have much longer life cycles since the quality of their optics and ccd - which are far more important than ridiculously high resolution - is superior. Most consumers only look at dpi figures as they don't know better (and true, don't often need better). And a good scanner is hardly obsolete even after end of production, it still works (cheaper ones may not) and software support will continue for years to come. To do better than that (in real life) I really have to throw in a lot more cash to get a X/Y scanner... E) Software makes a huge difference. Investing in a pro tool a such as Silverfast (£150ish) gives you calibration and greater control.

So this is my opinion after working 8 years in pre-press. Though pre-press demands differ from those of regular consumers, quality still stands on top. And his £300 (leaves change) for 35mm scanning is best spent on the Minolta. For £400 the Nikon gives more resolution and better in-box software. He didn't say he needs a flatbed - maybe he has one already - and if he does, he can get a good one for less than £100.

That's it, up to Nick.


Johan