Film Scanners

[cgw]

I'm guessing you've not even tried it, right? Fill me in on all the upgrades Epson or any other scanner maker have made that involved sensors, OK? Seem to recall endless discussions about futzing around with film holders in hopes of finding where the scanner actually focused. Happy with results from a D7200 and my Micro Nikkors. Glad you like your Plustek but it's not the only club in the bag.

What's to try? It's obvious a DSLR can't touch the resolution.

Resolution of what? Think you need to step out of the echo chamber.

 

[480sparky]

I'm guessing you've not even tried it, right? Fill me in on all the upgrades Epson or any other scanner maker have made that involved sensors, OK? Seem to recall endless discussions about futzing around with film holders in hopes of finding where the scanner actually focused. Happy with results from a D7200 and my Micro Nikkors. Glad you like your Plustek but it's not the only club in the bag.

What's to try? It's obvious a DSLR can't touch the resolution.

Resolution of what? Think you need to step out of the echo chamber.

Of........... the............ original.............. film................... image.

 

[cgw]

I'm guessing you've not even tried it, right? Fill me in on all the upgrades Epson or any other scanner maker have made that involved sensors, OK? Seem to recall endless discussions about futzing around with film holders in hopes of finding where the scanner actually focused. Happy with results from a D7200 and my Micro Nikkors. Glad you like your Plustek but it's not the only club in the bag.

What's to try? It's obvious a DSLR can't touch the resolution.

Resolution of what? Think you need to step out of the echo chamber.

Of........... the............ original.............. film................... image.

Scanners. We're talking scanners. Scanner resolution. Remember?

 

[480sparky]

I'm guessing you've not even tried it, right? Fill me in on all the upgrades Epson or any other scanner maker have made that involved sensors, OK? Seem to recall endless discussions about futzing around with film holders in hopes of finding where the scanner actually focused. Happy with results from a D7200 and my Micro Nikkors. Glad you like your Plustek but it's not the only club in the bag.

What's to try? It's obvious a DSLR can't touch the resolution.

Resolution of what? Think you need to step out of the echo chamber.

Of........... the............ original.............. film................... image.

Scanners. We're talking scanners. Scanner resolution. Remember?

Well, we were. But then someone started a tangent about DSLRs.

Hmmmm. I wonder who that was?

 

[cgw]

I'd recommend revisiting the OP's concerns about scanning costs. He owns digital cameras. Get it? No matter if you don't. Point made.

 

[mctb]

Didn't mean to start an argument here. Both methods seem to be fraught with downsides. The dslr seems to require more post processing than the scanner. The scanner requires more time input than the DSLR fit initial conversion. No real answer here. Pretty sure I'm going to go with a scanner though. I do not have a 1:1 macro lens anyway.

 

[limr]

Didn't mean to start an argument here. Both methods seem to be fraught with downsides. The scanner seems to require more post processing than the scanner. The scanner requires more time input than the DSLR fit initial conversion. No real answer here. Pretty sure I'm going to go with a scanner though. I do not have a 1:1 macro lens anyway.

You're right - it's really six of one and half a dozen of the other. There are issues with both methods and much of it will depend on how you prefer to work and what you want to get out of the scan. I personally have never had any issues focusing on the scan with my CanoScan. As for the time it takes - yes, at 2400 dpi, it can be slow, but it's not like you have to watch it or be involved in the process. Throw the strips into the holder, do any tweaking pre-scan that you'd like to do, start the scan, and then forget about it until it's done.

 

[mctb]

Didn't mean to start an argument here. Both methods seem to be fraught with downsides. The scanner seems to require more post processing than the scanner. The scanner requires more time input than the DSLR fit initial conversion. No real answer here. Pretty sure I'm going to go with a scanner though. I do not have a 1:1 macro lens anyway.

You're right - it's really six of one and half a dozen of the other. There are issues with both methods and much of it will depend on how you prefer to work and what you want to get out of the scan. I personally have never had any issues focusing on the scan with my CanoScan. As for the time it takes - yes, at 2400 dpi, it can be slow, but it's not like you have to watch it or be involved in the process. Throw the strips into the holder, do any tweaking pre-scan that you'd like to do, start the scan, and then forget about it until it's done.

What are we talking, time wise, at 2400 per frame?

 

[480sparky]

What are we talking, time wise, at 2400 per frame?

It really depends on the scanner.

 

[limr]

What are we talking, time wise, at 2400 per frame?

It really depends on the scanner.

It also depends on size of the negative and if it's color or black and white. The longest I'd say is about half an hour for a full tray of color 35mm (12 frames). 120 goes faster simply because you are scanning fewer frames - the holders are only big enough for 3 frames of 6x6 or 4 frames of 6x4.5.

 

[mctb]

What are we talking, time wise, at 2400 per frame?

It really depends on the scanner.

Your CanoScan. It's either that or the Epson.

 

[mctb]

It also depends on size of the negative and if it's color or black and white. The longest I'd say is about half an hour for a full tray of color 35mm (12 frames). 120 goes faster simply because you are scanning fewer frames - the holders are only big enough for 3 frames of 6x6 or 4 frames of 6x4.5.

That's not bad really. The way it was being mentioned, I was expecting longer. I imagine the DSLR method might be a quicker capture but the post processing difference might even things up a bit.

 

[480sparky]

What are we talking, time wise, at 2400 per frame?

It really depends on the scanner.

Your CanoScan. It's either that or the Epson.

Mine is a PlusTek.

 

[gsgary]

I've had big prints no problem from my Epson V500 and Plustek 7500

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

 

[table1349]

One thing I believe has not been mentioned is software. OEM software with any device is generally good but not the best. Personally I use Silverfast with my Epson V600.