rick_gerbehy1 Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 I purchased a Canon FS 2720 scanner about a year ago. I use it mostly to revive some old negatives that I have filed away in the past 30 years. It does a fair to good job for my needs. I must have about 100 2 1/4 rolls of B&W negatives from my Rolleiflex TLR...many dating back to the early 70's. Is there a comparible 2 1/4 negative scanner on the market in the same quality and price renge? (approx $400.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awahlster Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 Look at some of the Flat bed scanners they are slower then your Canon but will handle the 2 1/4. I have a Canon D2400UF 2400X1200 resolution it will do up to three frames at a time if your PC can handle a very large file all at once mine will only process one at a time but they are quite good. The scanner should be getting quite cheap I paid around $400.00 but that was almost 18 months ago. Mark W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom film holders for fl Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='tab-interval:.5in'> <p class=MsoNormal>In addition to the Epson 3200, you might look at the Epson 3170.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You can find a 3170 for $165ish and the 3200 is now $250ish after $100 rebate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>A review of the 3170 was posted recently so it might be worth reading.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>I posted the link in this forum a few days ago.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Look for �3170� in the message headings in this forum for maybe 2-3 days ago and you will find the link.</p> <p class=MsoNormal>Doug</p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt'>Doug�s �MF Film Holder� for scanning "strips" of medium format film:<a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~dougfisher/holder/mfholderintro.html">http://home.earthlink.net/~dougfisher/holder/mfholderintro.html</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p></p> </body> </html> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 Here we have alot of scanners ; about eight. We have the Canon FS 2710 and FS4000US ; 35mm film scanners 2720/4000 dpi/ppi. In Epson flatbeds; a 1200U, a 1250, and a photo 2450 unit. These are 1200 and 2400 dpi/ppi. A friend has a 3200 Epson; which we tested as not much better than our 2400 dpi/ppi unit. Epson has a 4800 dpi/ppi flatbed in Japan; with a better focused CCD head; according to their marketing hype. We will probably get one of these; in 2004; if/when they get to the USA. <BR><BR>I like the Epson flatbeds; but they yield a less practical resolution than a true film scanner. I scanned the same 35mm test negative; with all the scanners above; plus my friends Epson 3200 unit. The Epson 2450 and 3200 scans both limit the detail in a scan to about less than 30 lines pairs/mm; and thus dont show all the detail in a good sharp negative. But; they do pull alot of the info from the negative; and are a good value for alot of jobs. One can adjust ones scans with these units; and get great scans with some practice. The newer Epsons use USB 2.0; which helps with long scans. We use the Epson 2450 unit to scan 4x5 negatives; color and B&W. A drum scan requires mailing off the item. Many times the Epson scans are "good enough"; to get the job done; instead of the delay/expense of a drum scan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted November 22, 2003 Share Posted November 22, 2003 Rick; scanning 100 rolls of 120 film at 3200 dpi/ppi will require alot of time. The flatbeds seem to scan alot slower than my Canon film scanners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ward Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 I just bought a new, in-the-box minolta dimage scan multi II for $549. Maybe I'm just thrilled because it smells like new stuff, but it sure seems nice to me. I lusted after it when it was still $2200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now