Sprintscan 45 ; less then 100 euro

[willem_numan]

It's 2005 and I can now buy a Polaroid Sprintscan 45 (not 45i or 45

ultra) for less then 100 euro. Does that make it a good deal or should

I stay away from it and go for something like a Epson 4990 to scan my

4x5 negatives? I will be printing them on an Epson 2100.

I tryed the Epson 3200 and found it very soft. So will this older but

once more expensive didicated film scanner be better then a modern

flatbed?

[pascal_b.]

I'd say, go for it! Indeed prices of Polaroid scanners have dropped significantly in the last years and yet my experience is that they produce very good results. They are very well built and usually produce sharp scans. If you can find one in good condition at that price, frankly you're not taking a big risk...

Good luck

P.

[Jochen_S]

I can't give you any advice based on personal experience. I know that DTP-gear was a real bottomless money dump in the 1990s.

 

Google searching for specs I found the Polaroid claims to cope with a half impressive D-max of 3.4. The resolution isn't really high, providing maybe 6MP per 35mm slide. (Polaroid claimed 2000x4000 dpi I'd take half of it to count on) Modern flatbeds claim to produce 10MP.

 

If you really want incredible image quality you should try to hunt down a old drumscanner. The at least desk sized versions go rather cheap on ebay and aren't very atractive for professional printshops anymore, because they won't do much more than maybe 3 scans per hour as my master told me. Today there are nearly no customers left willing to pay enough for such a scan, so these units would be perfect amateur stuff, if one is able to take them home. (I fear my door is to narrow and there's no electricity at the garage)

 

If you feel totally disencouraged to buy the Polaroid you could do me a favour and provide the source. I suppose some scanner would be nice to have and I haven't got much money.

[marco_frigerio]

If you don't want to enlarge more than 4x or 5x (and with a 4x5" original this is more than a 2100 can handle), you will get excellent results with the 4990, it seems that these Epson's flatbed scaners have an hot spot in scanning large format.

Yes, they are soft, but with an appropriate digital workflow, i.e. an appropriate use of unsharp mask, you'll obtain beautiful results.

I've been scanning my 4x5" with a 3200 for the last 2 years and my A3+ prints made with the 2100 are killer sharp, gallery quality, I made some comparisons with some drum scans and at this "low" level of enlargement I don't see any difference in an A3+ print.

Obviously if you want to print larger (with a 4000 or a 7600/9600) it's a totally different matter.

Now I bought the new 4990 ans started scanning my 8x10" originals too.

 

Marco

 

http://www.cristinamian.com

[willem_numan]

Thanks to all for your answers. I haven't made up my mind yet. After I traded in my Sprintscan 35+ for a Coolscan V I was glad to get rid of scsi. So maybe I should go for the Epson 4990.

Jochen, you can find the Sprintscan 45 here: http://www.fotoapparatuur.nl/Polaroid/Scanner/Ad59109.html

Feel free to snatch it while I am still thinking :-)