some questions about film scanners

[ryan_wolstencroft]

I've been using Epson 3200 and 4870 flatbeds to scan film, mostly 6x6

and 6x7, and have been reasonably satisfied with the results. I've

begun to think that perhaps I'm only satisfied because I've never been

able to compare scan results with anything else. I believe the

statement "more pixels doesnt mean better pixels". I've been told that

dedicated film scanners can provide much better results than flatbeds.

I guess I'm asking if this is noticeably true. Are there any

comparisons available?

 

In my quick search for MF dedicated film scanners only three

manufacturers came up. Microtek, Minolta and Nikon. All of them were

far out of my price range. Do lower priced MF film scanners exist?

If so, are their results any better than flatbed results?

[ptucci]

Artixscan 120TF. $1,500.

 

<a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=282586&is=REG">Click it</A>

[jack paradise]

Several test have been done by german photo magazines (Ct's and Color Foto) and have shown that the flatbed's real (optical) resolution is much lower than their stated resolution.

 

The Epson 3200 (1100-1200 dpi), the Epson 4870 (1600-1700dpi) are still a long way from a dedicated film scanner like the Nikon 8000 (2895dpi). See the link below for some scanner comparison. It will give you an idea as to what can be achieved with these scanners.

 

http://www.scannerforum.com/

 

The following link shows scans from an Epson 4870, a Nikon 8000 and an Imacom film scanner. Although in french, you'll easely identify the scanner test images. Just scroll down.

 

http://www.galerie-photo.com/scanner-epson-4870.html

 

However, there's a new crop of scanners coming out, starting in November. The Canon 9950F, the Epson F3200 and another Epson scanner called in Japan the GT-X800. I'm hoping that this time, these scanner's optical resolution will be at least 2000dpi and wishing for 2400dpi.

[eugene_winter]

Some scan comparisons between a Polaroid MF scanner and an Epson flatbed:

http://gundam.srd.it/PhotoPages/epson_vs_polaroid.html

 

If you are serious about the quality of final photos, I bet you'll eventually have to find an alternative to your Epson flatbeds. I had been using Epson 2450 (essentially in the same league as your models) until I got Nikon LS-8000, and I must say it's night and day. The upgrade was no brainer...why would I use MF format if I'm not taking advantage of its greatest strengths over 35mm - image quality. I'm sorry for my rather discouraging comments. But one of the great things about film is that you can always scan it later with a better scanner.

[bruce watson]

You can do your own comparisons. You can probably find someone to scan your film for you. Try your local photo lab as many have film scanning capabilities. You can, of course, have your film drum scanned also. Drag the files up in an image editor side-by-side and have a look.

 

The Epson flat beds are actually rather good. Quite good for what they are, and what they cost. If you aren't planning on printing beyond about a 4x or 5x enlargement, you may well find that the improvements you get from other scanners aren't worth it to you. As enlargement goes up, you'll be able to see improvements from dedicated film scanners and drum scanners. How much it's worth is something you have to decide, because YMMV.

[billy_ness]

I have been looking into getting a MF scanner as well, and came to the conclusion that a decent one is still out of my price range, and I bought a Coolscan V instead since I have far more 35mm film than MF to scan. Then I just painfully watched this auction end, <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=15223&item=3844487115&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW">a 120tf for less than $600</a>... Just slightly more than I paid for my Nikon V. It seems possible it could be a selling scam since the seller is new and only got his feedback up by buying a few $1 items, but assuming it's a real deal I feel a little foolish, even though I doubt that situation comes along very often since most people know what they have and want to get it's actual value.

 

-done ranting-

[dave_cheng1]

I have access to free use of a Minolta MF film scanner. Here is one

scan of a 6x7 image I did recently. It is only an 8 bit scan.

I believe the scanner I used is already 4 to 5 years old. On Ebay it

can be had for around $500 and the latest one is close to $2k.

[daniel_staver1]

$600 sounds suspiciously low for this scanner. On the other hand, I got my 120tf for $1000 on eBay including a glass holder, so it's not unthinkable that it could be sold for a price like this.

[lol1]

I've been using an Nikon Coolscan IV for a few years now. OK, so it's not medium format but you might be interested to know that I am not entirely happy with it. While the compact size and easy operation are a plus, the fact is that it seems to be unable to focus on the edges of a negative -- only the middle area is truly sharp. I was speaking to a professional photo printer a couple of days ago and he confirmed that he had the same experience and recommended the <A Href=http://www.imacon.dk>Imacon</A> instead. It's a very expensive scanner but if you are talking quality then it's probably the way to go.

[mendel_leisk]

Lawrence, if only the middle is truly sharp, you might look into _where_ it is focussing. Minolta SW defaults to center of image. With dished/domed curvature of film in the holder, this is not the optimum location to focus. I'd suggest focussing more towards the edges. Then you will (theoretically) have a concentric oval in-focus, and less out-of-focus on either side of this oval. Look in to Vuescan, if you haven't. Its default focus location accomplishes this, you can move that default if you wish, or try manual spot focus. It is fairly bullet-proof. Once in a blue moon it will _completely_ misfocus, then you need to shift focus location a bit and try again. It doesn't require sharp contrast edge, just grain will do.

[lol1]

Mendel. Thanks for your suggestion. I did try Vuescan some time ago and didn't get on with it but I'll give it another go.

[mendel_leisk]

Lawrence, my brain was in neutral (happens frequently) when I mentioned Minolta software, seeing you're scanning with a Nikon. Anyway, the dish/dome theory holds. Are you able to move the focus around with Nikonware, or whatever it's called?