Optimum low cost MF scanning

Discussion in 'Medium Format' started by nigel_craig, Sep 23, 2001.

  1. When I upgrade my computer I will replace current Minolta Dual
    scanner for 35mm and Epson 1200s for 6x7. There are now three multi-
    format scanners (Minolta, Polaroid, Nikon) that give 4000dpi that i
    would die for- unfortunately partner has indicated that is exactly
    what will happen if I spend that much on a scanner! Given compromise
    of Canon,Polaroid or Microtek 4000dpi 35mm scanner what is current
    best solution for 6x7 for say £350/$500US - Canon 2400 or Epson 1640
    flatbeds (PS, not much impressed with epson 1200 as a film scanner -
    sharpness seems hit or miss) I can always say current Epson won't
    work with Windows XP.
     
  2. I've just picked up an Epson Perfection 1600 and am awaiting my tranny adaptor; I'm sure I'll forget but if you'd like me to send a few sample scans of what the new 1600 can do, email me and I'd be happy to do so.
     
  3. I have scanned a few of my MF images with the Epson 1640SU. Check them out and see what you think. They are the ones in my "Fiji" folder and the "Tarpon Springs" folder. Draw your own conclusions as to whether or not they would be suitable for your wants/needs.
    Cheers.
     
  4. Nigel,
    I purchased an Epson 1640 with TPU about a month ago for scanning my 6x6 and 6x9 negs and slides. I have been EXTREMELY pleased with the quality of the scans for the sizes of prints (8x10, 11x17) I want to produce: (1) the equipment worked flawlessly from day one and (2) the software interface is very easy and intuitive to use. It has worked well for black and white negatives (TMax 100) as well as color transparencies (Provia 100F). Note, however, that its resolution is limited to 1600 dpi.

    As a low cost solution for MF scanning, I would recommend this equipment.

    Joffre
     
  5. I also recommend the Epson 1640SU Photo as a great value for the price. I only use mine for web scanning, but it's easy to use and gives results that please me from medium format and 4x5. You can see lots of examples on my website: www.dannyburk.com.
     
  6. I also have the Epson 1200 and find it's performance weak. The 1640 does get better reviews.
    I'm waiting for the next generation of Epson scanners. They have a model 2450 that looks interesting. It has both USB2 and Firewire connections.
    Epson announcement
    I am also putting together a faster computer with more memory.
     
  7. The Epson 1640SU is the only real player I'm aware of in the $400-500 range, and that's the reason I bought it. Virtually every other scanner owner I know that bought something else in the same price range is whining about not getting the Epson. The biggest advantage of the 1640SU is it will scan any type of film you can get light through. I've been selling 8x10 ink-jet prints made from the thing, and they don't look like cheap flatbed prints.

    I haven't seen any reviews on the 2450, but if it can double the 1640's 1200 dpi real world resolution, it's going to be a bigger steal than the 1640.
     
  8. If you want to scan MF film for printing enlargements beyond 8x10, please stay away from the Canon Canoscan D2400UF.

    I bought one in May and have been totally frustrated with it. It seems to have a major problem with focusing because nothing comes out sharp. It also has a problem with handling high contrast areas (light against dark). And its 2400dpi mode looks worse than 1200dpi -- meaning that I paid extra for a 2400dpi capable scanner but end up using it at 1200dpi most of the time.

    If you care to look, have some sample scans at: http://www.tbns.net/kevinspages/canoscan/
     
  9. Kevin,

    The 1640SU blooms a bit also, but nothing worse than other CCD scanners. At 1600DPI I can resolve sharp grain in 6x7 velvia trannies with the 1640SU.
     
  10. I realize it's been a few months since this forum was created. I purchased the Epson 1640SU scanner about 6 months ago and was using it with my Mac and PC and was somewhat disappointed with the results. Because of my disappointment, I haven't used it much since then. I feel that especially the sharpness of the image, as well as the color saturation, contrast, and/or exposure is almost always off, both from print scanning and direct film scans. I am currently using the Epson TWAIN 5 driver/software with Photoshop 6 on my PC. I have tried a few approaches, including manually adjusting the curves and deselecting the auto-exposure box, adjusting exposure, etc. Since many of you are using this same scanner and have claimed good results, I would be interested in suggestions you have for improving my results. Any advice would be very much appreciated.

    An interesting note: after I make a scan, the photoshop-type file seems washed-out with too much exposure, but when I convert to jpeg-type file the jpeg image is darker than the photoshop file. Anyone else experience this odd shift in values? Oddly, the jpeg values seem closer to the original than the working photoshop file. I would think this were a color calibration problem, except I think that would be the problem between screen and print-out rather than the same screen differences between photoshop-type to jpeg-type.
     

Share This Page