Inexpensive Medium Format Transparency Scanner

[cpj]

For "exhibition grade" prints I send out my medium format transparencies for Tango drum

scans at 300 mb, printed on Fuji Chrystal Archive glossy photo paper. That's big $$$. Is

there a reasonably-priced (under $1000) medium format film/transparancy scanner I can

buy for what would be editing, cropping, proofing, or just making a quick 8x10 inkjet

print for aunt Millie?

 

I know the Nikon Coolscan 9000 will do it but that's $1800 and a lot more technically

advanced and higher quality than I need. Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

[conrad_hoffman]

Not good enough for the fanatic, but plenty good enough for Aunt Millie (and me) is the Epson 4490. It's similar to the well regarded 4990, but has a smaller illuminated area (not quite big enough for 4x5), and costs about half as much.

[brian_walton]

Have a good look at the CanoScan 9950F (I'm very pleased with mine). And remember its not just the scanner that makes good scans....its good software (Vuescan), a good monitor and an operator who is doing it all the time.

 

Brian

[troyammons]

If you cant afford the 9000, I would go for a used 8000.

 

I have seen a few 8000 scans that were almost as sharp as a drum scan.

[derek_stanton2]

Epson 4990, or look for a used Minolta or Nikon filmscanner.

[stephen_scardamalia]

I'm in the same boat - my best shots get drum scans but for proofing, web, etc, I just picked up an Epson 4490 - less than $230 shipped from Amazon. Sure, the 4990 is probably better, but for the price difference it wasn't worth it. The software is decent too.

[ilkka_nissila]

Get a 9000 or one of Nikon's previous generation medium format scanners second hand. I can't imagine why you would go through the trouble of scanning and editing files on a scanner which scans files so soft that you can use 6 MP digital camera to get more detailed prints with much less effort. I have a 4990 and regret the day I listened to photo.netters praising it. My D70 produces much better 8x10 prints than Mamiya 7 + Epson 4990.

 

Get a real scanner and if you can't afford it, save until you can.

[michael_p6]

I'm also very interested in that subject. I get my transparencies scanned at my local Fuji lab, but the files are about 9MP (3000x3000), a bit noisy, and the dynamic range is nowhere near what is on the plastic on the lightable.

Oh, and my Canon 350D gives me better results (range, clarity) on the same scene.

 

So I'm really curious as how you guys get your 120 films scanned, to get enough to print "poster size".

The various reviews of scanners always show bits and pieces of shots, but I have never seen a 10000x10000 complete scan (for example) of a slide available for download; in JPEG2000 is would'nt be THAT large in our days of broadband.

So I still have no idea of the amount of details/range I can expect with MF. So far, my suposedly crummy digital camera wins...

[kelly_flanigan1]

Our older Epson 2450 is sharper than our 3200; and of course our 1200 and 600 units. It is even sharper than the two 4800 dpi class Epsons we have tested. A second 2450 epson we have is sharper than our 1200 unit; but below the sharp 2450 unit by a country mile. These flatbeds do vary in sharpness; even for the same model number. This is why some folks get acceptable results; and others think they are junk.

[lorenz_wyss]

Not so fast there Michael P. I have been using a Canon 9950F to scan 6x6 slides and negatives and they end up being about 10,400x 10,400 pixels. I think one reason you don't see too many of them is that the files are gigantic, and most systems don't allow them. They are impossible to send by email for example. I noticed very obvious image degradation if I used ACDSee to compress the files into something that can be sent or uploaded to a site like Flickr.

[michael_p6]

I do suspect the MF can deliver, on the film; my problem is how to get it from the film into the computer really. Seems the prints I get from these films are prints-from-scan anyway, so I'd rather make sure the scan is done properly with a process I can control.

 

So should I just trigger the credit card and get a 4990 ? I mean, considering the cost of the lowres scans I get, the scanner price will be covered in about 20 films or so... (?284 at amazon, with free delivery)

 

Or is there an alternate scanner that is worth looking into, in the same price range ? (or less, of course :->)

 

It's sad to have to blow that amount of money still, it's a lot more than the price I paid for the camera, and I'd rather buy a 50mm but ....

[lorenz_wyss]

All I can say is that I don't know how I lived without my scanner. For me it has been very important to scan all the slides, color negatives and prints my family has accumulated over the decades. I feel I have to duplicate them so that they can't be lost, and it is amazing to reprint dozens of old pictures that have not been looked at in 15 years.

The point is that investing in a scanner is a small price to pay and it will likely do more for you than scan pictures you will take in the future.

[bill_karoly1]

I've has my Epson Perfection 4490 Photo since the beginning of October 2005 and so far I am not pleased. The first scanner started making loud clacking sounds so I took it back to Ciruit City and exchanged it. It sat in the box for a month and a half before I decided to take it out and give it another try (I was going to sell it instead). It worked for a couple days before it died. Check my pbase for an example scan. www.pbase.com/billkaroly/

 

Epson had me take it to a local authorized repair center here in Tulsa and they had it back to me in a couple days. Turns out the lids was defective. I used it for a few days with success until today and it's doing the same thing all over again. So back it goes.

 

When it works I find it is ok for medium format slides and negs but it is a little on the soft side but that's ok for proofing and maybe even 8x10 prints. 35mm scans are worthless with this scanner.