Epson perfection 2450 scanner

[summer_morris]

Hi everyone, so I'm planning on

buying my boyfriend a film scanner

for his birthday and have found a

cheap (100 dollars AUD) epson

perfection 2450. The seller

doesn't know much about it and I

don't know if it is even

compatible with more recent

computers considering it was made

around 2000-2001. My reason for

getting it was that it's the

cheapest I can find that scans

35mm and 120/220 (I can't afford

much I'm still at school), but is

it worth getting such an outdated

model that scans both or should I

just get a dedicated 35mm one? Any

recommendations are also very very

much appreciated! :)

[thirteenthumbs]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm planning on buying my boyfriend a film scanner for his birthday</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A flat bed scanner does a fair job on 120/220 and a poor job on 35mm film.<br>

The 2450 has a max optical resolution of 2400 ppi which will only produce a fair scan on 120 that might make a good 11 x 14 print but on 35mm a 4x6 print will be about the best, good enough to know which negatives warrant a better scan.<br>

Epson's web site shows drivers for Win 7 but it most likely will not run on Win 8 or higher.<br>

I would not pay more than half of the asking price for one complete with all the negative holders that it shipped with and less if they are missing.<br>

Check Epson's Clearance Center for refurbished scanners. They occasionally have V500, V550, or V600 for reasonable prices that should fall within reach of your budget. Even one of these won't do much better than an 8x10 for 35mm but will be good enough for a 16x20 from 120 provided it is a very good exposure.</p>

<p>A dedicated scanner for 35mm is best. Plustek makes good 35mm scanners.</p>

<p> </p>

[yann1]

<p>It's an excellent scanner. I used it to scan a 120 b&W print and printed it 3x3ft for a charity exhibition. . When it died, I bought a v600, and it's either very bad or i don't know how to use it correctly. For 35mm it's not that good but still ok. Careful it's indeed a very old machine, don't buy if the seller says he doesn't know if it works. Also, your boyfriend knows what his needs are an d you should consult him first.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>It's a nice scanner, mine is up in the attic, having been replaced by an Epson V750. But it is only USB 1.1 interface, so it's <strong>SLOOOOOOW</strong> when scanning at high resolution. Scanning 120 at full resolution can take many minutes per frame. That's what eventually drove me up the wall.<br>

Price is way too high, at least for the US. They go used for $20 to $50 on eBay. I do know everything is more expensive in ANZ.<br>

Try and find an Epson one generation newer, so it has USB 2.0 interface.</p>

[cbender]

<p>I have one which I still use. It's a good scanner for 120 as flatbeds go. I haven't tried scanning 35mm on it. I do have a few frames scanned with the Epson which I then had scanned professionally with a Imacon X5. The X5 scans are obviously much much better.<br>

The 2450 works fine under Windows 7. I agree with others that the price is too high. To get really good results, I suspect you'll need a non-Epson film holder. I have an extra of the betterscanning models that I'd be willing to sell you for very cheap (bought a replacement after I couldn't find my original one, only to find it some months later).</p>

 

[John Seaman]

<p>Having used one of these for a number of years I agree with what has been said. Reasonable for medium format, struggles with 35mm but OK for internet and small prints, and the price is too high. I would add that its a very good scanner for prints and documents. I upgraded to a 4870 with on paper, double the resolution, but I found it not that much better than the 2450.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>I know some people like them, but I've tried scanning film on flatbed scanners and they don't make the cut for me. As some of the posts indicate here, maybe they are "good enough" for 120. But if you have to shoot medium format to get a quality scan from your scanner, that defeats the purpose of shooting medium format. MF is supposed to give you better quality than 35mm, not essentially the same as what you would get on 35mm in an actual film scanner. Bottom line -- IMHO, don't buy this scanner.<br /><br />Secondly, my rule is never buy equipment for a photographer, not even if you are a photographer yourself. Photographers are extremely picky about what they want. There is no such thing as "the same as" or "as good as." There's always a huge risk that what you buy isn't what they want but that to keep the relationship happy they won't tell you and money that could have gone to what they really wanted gets wasted. Instead, offer him the cash, or go with him to the camera store and let him pick out whatever he wants while offering to put $100 toward whatever it costs.</p>

[a._t._burke]

<p>Ms. Morris,</p>

<p>I've owned a 2450 since new. I also have later flatbeds, as well as the latest generation Nikon film-only scanners, the 5000 and 9000. The 2450 does a better job that you'd think. Below I have put a tag for a scan from a medium format slide done on a 2450. You might take a look at the resolution on both the license plate and the little lettering that can be seen on the right rear hubcap.</p>

<p><a href=" </p>

<p>Also at the top of the page, tap on the 2048 size and take a look at how sharp that is. Move the view around on your screen and you can see how really crisp that would be on a very large enlargement. If you tap on the other size numbers, 1600, etc., you can kind of get an idea of how sharp it will be at various size prints. Of course, the print may be printed even sharper at up to 300 ppi where your screen has less than 100 ppi. </p>

<p>Next to that in my photo stream is the same slide done on two other scanners, supposedly having much more resolution. It's true they do a little better job, but the 2450 is quite adequate. It also does 4X5 positive and negative film. In its day, it was their top of the line unit and is better made than some of the higher numbered later models that weren't at the absolute top of the range at that later time.</p>

<p>It is an excellent starter scanner. The USB 1.1 is not as slow compared to the 4180 with the USB 2, which technically should be much faster, but isn't.</p>

<p>You're a good girlfriend to have. Not only are you willing to give him a gift that he would like, but you're using extra effort and trying extra hard to get just the right product. It seems not many people care that much, but you do.</p>

<p>A. T. Burke</p>

[summer_morris]

Thanks for the advice everyone, I understand that it

would be much easier to ask him what he wants and I'm

dying to ask him about it haha, but I do want it to be a

surprise. I'll keep looking and check out the epson

clearance to see if I can find find a newer model/better

deal, and if not I'll most likely get a 35mm one, I didn't

realise the flatbed wouldn't have the best result for

35mm, as that's what we generally shoot. Thanks again

everyone, I might come back to this to ask all your

advice if I find another option :)

[summer_morris]

Hi again, I've now found an epson v37 for $75 on the

epson clearance centre website, it's a flatbed but

doesn't scan 120 so I'm not too sure about it, there's

also the kaiser baas photomaker for under 100 which

I've used at school and I've found it ok. Probably a

stupid question but there's no way to scan 120 on a

flatbed that doesn't specify the capability to is there?

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>Skip it. It would be OK for scanning prints with but nothing more.<br /> A transparency unit is needed to scan negatives or slides.<br /> The V370 is the lowest model listed that has a transparency unit but it only does 35mm. A dedicated 35mm scanner will do better.<br /> The V500 is the lowest model that will scan 120. It has been replaced by the V550. I picked up a refurbished V500 for $99 US a little over a year ago on the clearance center and they might show up once more but they will be few and far between.<br /> Occasionally someone buys a new scanner to do a project then sells it on Craiglist for a reasonable price.</p>

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>adapter=unit, edit timer timed out during the edit.</p>

[summer_morris]

I found a canoscan 8600f for 100 bucks on Gumtree, it's

so hard to tell what's good because all the reviews are

from when they first came out.

[thirteenthumbs]

<p>The 8600f should go a good job on 120 and fair on 35. I'm not a cannon person so I don't know if its a good price or not. Cannon USA shows drivers for Win8.1 so it will work on current operating systems without problems.<br>

Cannon's site shows it came with a 35mm film holder, a 35mm mounted slide holder, and a 120 film holder so make sure you get these with it as they will be hard to get otherwise.</p>

<p>Test it before you buy it if possible. </p>

[peter_simpson1]

I second the V600 suggestion. They are $160-200 here in the US right now. To my taste they are a good compromise. If I need higher resolution I will send the neg out.

[steven_clark]

<p>It's probably acceptable for 120, but trying to get any print larger than 5x7in out of it from 35mm film will drive people mad.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>2450 is a perfectly OK scanner. I have one and use it on a Windows 8 machine with Vuescan. In its day its was considered very good. As others say, it is fine for medium format (11 x 14 is the max I would ever go with it, if you are lucky), it has the usual issues that all flatbeds have with film, and I am not confident that more recent ones are significantly better in their essentials, after all, this is all well-understand electronics. I've never used it for 35mm but suspect it would serviceable, but I doubt you could produce a great print larger than 8 x 10 on it, but again many people think this is still the case with the average flatbed.</p>