Scanner for non didgital photographer

[CMoore]

I am not a "Film Snob"...i am an older person that has film cameras and no digital cameras.
I think digital cameras are Fabulous/Amazing.!!.......they are probably the best choice for 98% of The World. I simply have no interest in them myself.
That said.....i am looking for a scanner. I did a Forum Search, and there is a lot of info, but a lot of it is several years old, so i am going to ask again.
What scanner "should" i buy.?
I have no desire to print anything, i have a darkroom at my house. Sometimes i want to be able to ask questions (regarding my negs/photos) on APUG, but i have no way of getting my B&W Negatives/Photos into my computer.
Is there a "decent" scanner for mostly 35mm but also (if possible but not crucial) 6x7.?
Maybe in the 200-500 usa dollar range.?
Thank You

 

[pschwart]

A Canon or Epson consumer flatbed scanner is not an ideal choice for smaller formats, but if your requirements are to be able to scan both 35mm and medium format for online posting with a budget of $200-$500, then one of these would be sufficient. A flatbed scanner is useful for many things -- scanning prints, OCR, a cheapo copy machine -- so I have an Epson V700 in addition to a dedicated film scanner. I haven't used the Epson for scanning film in a long time, but it did a decent job, especially low magnification with medium format in a glass carrier. Someone here probably has hands-on experience with one of the less expensive models.

 

[John_M_King]

If you can find a Nikon Coolscan 4 or 5 they will do a cracking job. The second model is the latest and will give superb scans, it will even scan in the RAW mode so you get all the information from the scanner to let you 'improve' the finished scan more easily.
The downside is they will not use any later software than Windows XP unless you use aftermarket software like Silverfast.

 

[CMoore]

A Canon or Epson consumer flatbed scanner is not an ideal choice for smaller formats, but if your requirements are to be able to scan both 35mm and medium format for online posting with a budget of $200-$500, then one of these would be sufficient. A flatbed scanner is useful for many things -- scanning prints, OCR, a cheapo copy machine -- so I have an Epson V700 in addition to a dedicated film scanner. I haven't used the Epson for scanning film in a long time, but it did a decent job, especially low magnification with medium format in a glass carrier. Someone here probably has hands-on experience with one of the less expensive models.

10-4. Thank You
This is all new to me. It seems there are the Cheaper/Consumer type of flat scanner (as you were saying) that are in my price range, and then the money goes up real fast for a "good" scanner.
I am just guessing, but i have a feeling that one of those Epson will be fine for getting some of my negs onto The Internet a few times each year.
Thanks Again

 

[CMoore]

BTW......i DID try to Edit the title of my OP for spelling, but when i hit The Edit button, all i could ever get was the Spinning Wheel Of Death.
Same with my post above this one.....hit Edit and it just spins and spins.......

 

[Alan Klein]

I use an Epson V600 which you can get new for $200. It scans 35mm and medium format (MF). (I use a Mamiya RB67 for 6x7's) If you click on my site below you can check out scans of 35mm slides, as well as MF chromes and negatives (color and BW). I think it does pretty good job for the web. It takes awhile to get up to speed using it. I don't print much so I can't speak to that. You can also use it to scan prints and it does a pretty good job correcting for faded color or cracks and wrinkles.

Good luck.

 

[CMoore]

Thanks Alan -
From the reviews (like yours here) i have read, i am leaning toward that Epson. It seems like it will do a fine job of any scanning that my Pulitzer Prize Winning negatives will require.
The RB67 is the only MF Camera i own, so it it nice to know you have had experience with that as well.
Thanks Again

 

[removed account4]

denny

i have an old work horse scanner i bought off the epson site IDK 10 years ago, its a 4870 and i have
used it non stop for the whole time i have had it. a few months ago my printer died ...
i looked and looked for something to replace my canon printer which was around the same
vintage as the scanner and ended up getting a 70$ ( that includes the 2 year extended warranty ! )
all in one scanner+printer i think it is called the expression 640 or something.
granted it is a consumer scanner/printer but i have to admit i am extremely impressed.
the software is pretty good and ez that runs it, and vue scan works it too ..
AND when i did a head to head comparison between the 4870 and the 640 .. it held up pretty well.
( couldnt tell the difference between the two of them ) i know there are people
who spend a lot of time and $ on scanners and scanning and making really impressive prints and scans
and everything else, but to be honest i am not one of these people, i can't really tell the difference
between a flatbed scan and a drum scan ... and i have made/sold/had printed some
pretty large images from small film and big scans ..
good luck with your search !
john

 

[pschwart]

Why compare the Epson Expression 640 to the 4870? The 640 doesn't even have a transparency unit so it can't scan film. The OP mentioned scanning 35mm and medium format film, so the 640 is not a solution.

denny

i have an old work horse scanner i bought off the epson site IDK 10 years ago, its a 4870 and i have
used it non stop for the whole time i have had it. a few months ago my printer died ...
i looked and looked for something to replace my canon printer which was around the same
vintage as the scanner and ended up getting a 70$ ( that includes the 2 year extended warranty ! )
all in one scanner+printer i think it is called the expression 640 or something.
granted it is a consumer scanner/printer but i have to admit i am extremely impressed.
the software is pretty good and ez that runs it, and vue scan works it too ..
AND when i did a head to head comparison between the 4870 and the 640 .. it held up pretty well.
( couldnt tell the difference between the two of them ) i know there are people
who spend a lot of time and $ on scanners and scanning and making really impressive prints and scans
and everything else, but to be honest i am not one of these people, i can't really tell the difference
between a flatbed scan and a drum scan ... and i have made/sold/had printed some
pretty large images from small film and big scans ..
good luck with your search !
john

 

[removed account4]

my bad
OP
strike my entry
unless you somehow have prints..

 

[CMoore]

No Problem ...not saying i will "Never" need it for prints.....but my main use is going to be for Film/Negatives, and mostly 35mm.
Thanks

 

[Kino]

The Epson 4990 and 700 series are both fine flatbed scanners that can scan up to 8x10 negatives. The 4990 can be picked up used for a reasonable price and the bundled (downloadable from Epson) software is very good in its own right for what it does.

Replacement scanner glass, if that is an issue, can be purchased at http://fpointinc.com/glass.htm.

 

[ozphoto]

I use a Plustek 7200i for my 35mm negs and transparencies. I also have an old Agfascan 1200 - scans my MF and LF work as well as prints.
I haven't tried the Epson scanners - but I've heard good reports.

 

[jim10219]

Why do you not want to go Digital? The reason why I ask is because scanning film is an art form in and of itself. So if you're avoiding using a digital camera because you don't want to have to go through the process of learning how to use one, then scanning negatives is definitely not something you're going to enjoy.

In any case, using a flatbed scanner for 35mm film will leave you unimpressed. The results from that are pretty bad usually. They work better on larger formats, but 35mm film negatives just require too much magnification to make use of, and those flat bed scanners just aren't up to the task. Even the expensive ones. You really need a dedicated film scanner for that. Or do what I do. I actually use a DSLR to "scan" my 35mm film shots because I already had one and it was a cheaper option than buying a dedicated 35mm film scanner. Plus it gives much better results than my flat bed scanner (Epson 4990). Though I still use my flat bed scanner for large format negatives. For medium format, I still use my DSLR and take multiple shots and stitch them together in Photoshop. The flat bed scanner works okay with medium format, but it's not amazing. It's still leagues beyond the results I get from 35mm. The DSLR definitely gives better results than the flat bed, though stitching can be a pain sometimes. So sometimes I still scan my medium format with the flatbed just for convenience.

They do make some dedicated film scanners that will do a decent job of medium format AND 35mm film, but I've not seen any anywhere near your budget.

EDIT: I skipped over the part about you not wanting to print from these scans. In that case, a flat bed will work. You don't need much to scan a 35mm negative to look decent on a computer screen. But it will still be a bit of a long and tedious process, as you have to figure out a way to crop the picture, invert the film, and edit the colors to remove the film base (if doing color negative film). So be sure to budget the price of software into your decision.

 

[faberryman]

What is the largest size print you do. If it is 8.5"x11" or less, a flatbed is the way to go. That way you'll be able to capture your darkroom work in the final image. If you print larger, then scanning the negative is the way to go. A film scanner like the PacificImage XE for 35mm is in your budget and has an actual resolution of 4100dpi which resolves the grain.

 

[pdeeh]

If your needs are fairly straightforward, and you don't need to produce scans good enough to print from, and all you need to do is just get stuff onto the Internet for other people to look at - you don't need anything complicated.

Scanning only need be as complicated as you want to make it and the idea that it's a special art all of its own is really a bit of an exaggeration, although one commonly repeated.

I use a dedicated plustek 7600i scanner for my 35mm and frankly it's a pain in the arse, because scanning a roll of 36 exposes takes me about 2 hours and it's very dull!

it sounds as if for your purposes a flatbed scanner, and not a very high end one either will do perfectly well.

Ages ago I wrote a primer on using something called negfix8 with raw scans. it's posted somewhere in what used to be the hybrid social group thing on apug I think. although under the new setup I'm not sure where that is now

 

[Richard Man]

If all you want are posting on the forum or FB/Internet to ask questions, then indeed an Epson flatbed is your best bet in terms of not costing too much and will do the job. An Epson V500 / V600 would be a good choice, or even the older 4870 etc. would be fine.

 

[juan]

Look on epson's site and search for the clearance or refurbished section. See if there's anything in there - you can usually save a significant amount of money on a machine that probably never had anything wrong with it. When I was in retail, I saw a lot of claims of non-working merchandise, when the real problem was a spousal fit.

 

[Chan Tran]

Although you have no interest in digital camera you could buy one to copy the negatives.

 

[John_A]

If you dont mind to gamble a bit, there is the Minolta Scan Dual II, III and IV. All are dedicated 35mm film and slide scanners with usb. The II & III scans with 2820 dpi, the IV with 3200.
Vuescan scanning software is a must have, since the original Minolta Scan utility is ancient.
I got my III of eBay 4 years ago for 110$ including shipping, and it has done an excellent job. Infact a lot better than any flatbed scanner Ive used.
But, you never know how long used equipment will last.

 

[RattyMouse]

If your needs are fairly straightforward, and you don't need to produce scans good enough to print from, and all you need to do is just get stuff onto the Internet for other people to look at - you don't need anything complicated.

Scanning only need be as complicated as you want to make it and the idea that it's a special art all of its own is really a bit of an exaggeration, although one commonly repeated.

I use a dedicated plustek 7600i scanner for my 35mm and frankly it's a pain in the arse, because scanning a roll of 36 exposes takes me about 2 hours and it's very dull!

it sounds as if for your purposes a flatbed scanner, and not a very high end one either will do perfectly well.

Ages ago I wrote a primer on using something called negfix8 with raw scans. it's posted somewhere in what used to be the hybrid social group thing on apug I think. although under the new setup I'm not sure where that is now

Wow...2 hours to scan one roll of 35mm film? That's amazing. I have a Plustek OpticFilm 120 and while I've never timed it, I would say that I could scan 36 images in about an hour; certainly not more.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

If you just want to get your images on the net, a flatbed would do fine. If I was going to replace the old Canon 9950 I still use (I think it came out about 12 years ago!) and didn't need 4x5, I would get Canon's current scanner which is the 9000 I believe. Canon is an optics company. Epson is a computer company. Guess which is more important....

One thing to note is scanners haven't changed for a really long time. The only things that have changed are the model numbers. You would think that in this day and age Canon or Epson would come up with something better, but they won't. Kinda sad. The latest Epson barely makes it over 2000dpi which is not as good as a run of the mill graphic arts scanner from the mid 90s.

 

[winger]

I've been using an Epson 4870 since 2004. If it ever dies, I'll likely get the most recent Epson. This one still runs on my newer iMac and has been moved at least four times ( 3 different states). Everything in my gallery here was scanned on it. 35mm negs don't scan beautifully, but they are acceptable (even for 8x10 prints sometimes). Medium format is no problem. Most of my scans are just for showing things on the web and the flatbed works just fine.

 

[pdeeh]

Ages ago I wrote a primer on using something called negfix8 with raw scans. it's posted somewhere in what used to be the hybrid social group thing on apug I think. although under the new setup I'm not sure where that is now

Tracked it down, it's here:
https://photrio.com/forum/index.php...ent-a-workflow-using-negfix8.13556/discussion

However it doesn't read well now I look at it again, and I neglected to mention I only use black and white so can't speak for colour.

I'll have a go at a rewrite if there's any interest.

 

[CMoore]

If your needs are fairly straightforward, and you don't need to produce scans good enough to print from, and all you need to do is just get stuff onto the Internet for other people to look at - you don't need anything complicated.

Scanning only need be as complicated as you want to make it and the idea that it's a special art all of its own is really a bit of an exaggeration, although one commonly repeated.

I use a dedicated plustek 7600i scanner for my 35mm and frankly it's a pain in the arse, because scanning a roll of 36 exposes takes me about 2 hours and it's very dull!

it sounds as if for your purposes a flatbed scanner, and not a very high end one either will do perfectly well.

Ages ago I wrote a primer on using something called negfix8 with raw scans. it's posted somewhere in what used to be the hybrid social group thing on apug I think. although under the new setup I'm not sure where that is now

Thank You.....Yes, this is exactly what i am after. I do not want to scan for any other reason than having a way to get my Negs onto APUG.
Imagine THIS Scenario....."I think my shutter curtain might be broken...look at these Negs i shot...what do you guys think".?
I am not scanning for scanning sake, just as a way to get help with Photography/Cameras.
Thanks Again