Film Scanner

  Spr 13:26 06 Nov 03
Locked

I am thinking of buying a Scanner to copy my Film slides onto my PC, I have two I?m toying with.
1) Has 38400 dpi high resolution with 2800dpi optical film scanning resolution.
2) 1800 dpi optical resolution, Detailed 4.2 million pixel images.
What is the difference between & which would be the best buy for the best results

  Filch 16:59 06 Nov 03

I assume you a speaking of flat bed scanners. If so, forget it. Go for a film scanner such as Minolta's Scan Dual II or III. There are several available, I mention Minolta as that's what I use and am familiar with it. Go the various web sites, Canon, Minolta, &c, and see what they have to offer.

  pj123 17:39 06 Nov 03

If it is for 35mm only you can't do better than the one I have. Primefilm 1800 get it from Jessops at ?130. click here

  Smiler 17:40 06 Nov 03

I used to have a dedicated scanner but because it was a parallel device it was slow and would not let me use anything else while scanning so I bought an Epson 3200 flatbed scanner with a built in transparency light. It's USB 2 or Firewire. Capable of 3200 X 6400 resolution and upto 12800 dpi with software. I also cosidered the Canon 9900F. Have a look here click here

Scroll down to the interactive review and see a comparison and totla review of both by Vincent Oliver who is a proffessional photographer. Even he was impressed by the scanning capabilities of both scanners. Giving 9 out of 10 for the Epson and 8 out of 10 for the Canon.

There is also an Epson 3170 which is a cut down version of the 3200.

  imarcus2 18:18 06 Nov 03

Like Spr, I have a lot of filmbased fotos that I like in both colour neg and slide format.

I started with an HPFotosmart S20 scanned both pretty well at 2,400 ppi, and the output [suitably processed in PhotoShop] could produce A4 prints from 20MB file sizes = ~7MP. Mechanicals let it down after 3 years.

Then took the Smiler route, and bought an Epson 2450 -- optical scanning at 2,400 ppi + halfstep semi-optical scanning to reach 3,200ppi. Well, yes, the scanner works, but it's very slow, even on USB2, taking some 400 seconds for a 2,400 ppi scan of a colour negative. I also find that high contrast sunny subjects produce reasonable images, but less contrasty ones need serious handfulls of PhotoShop contrast and unsharpmask to print out at A4. Not sure why this should be so, perhaps a function of flatbed, but not convinced. Am not satisfied with the out put quality before printing [I use an Epson 870 printer, and I am happy with that!].

So I have now bought a second hand Minolta Dimage Scan Dual III. Slide/colour negs, only 35mm size [APS adapter extra.] Cracking scans in under 30 secs, 2,820 ppi = 31MB file size, shade over 10MP. Much more useable scans than the Epson -- trouble is, all the film imperfections are shown up too! Quality of out put easily A4 even with plenty of cropping. Could probably get to A3 with the aid of NeatImage corrections to recover the film imperfections.

My major film camera is [but hardly used now] a Nikon 401s.

As far as prints etc. go, the best of the film scans are approximately as good as my first DI camera [Minolta S304 at 3.2MP], and fall well short of my current Minolta 7i at 5MP. DI camera outputs require almost no processing!

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

What is Amazon Go and will it come to the UK? The store without checkouts or queues

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

Why ecommerce hasn't taken off on social media

Super Mario Run preview | Hands-on first impressions of Super Mario Run: Mario's iPhone & iPad…