looking for a budget photo scanner?

[RRYANSMITHH]

I'm looking for a scanner that can scan both prints and negatives, for less than $200?

That might be a lot to ask for, but considering the fact that I only shoot with film, I have a lot of prints and negs just laying around that I'd like to get on Flickr.

Suggestions?

 

[dawn]

Walmart.com: Pandigital 4" x 6" Personal Photo, Slide, and Negative Scanner/Converter: Computers

I just bought this one. It's not anything to get too excited about, but for $78, it's exactly what I wanted. The color is slightly off on some of them, but a few seconds in gimp and you're good.

This is how the photo looked when scanned from the negative, no post processing:

This is after I added color

I think I over corrected now that I look at them together

And at some point, I got dust in the scanner, so I got these lines:

If your negs are scratched (like the butterfly one), you see the scratches. But for the convenience and price, it does pretty good.

This scanner does 4x6 and smaller, plus negatives and slides. I think they have one that does 8 x 10.

 

[RRYANSMITHH]

So, I've narrowed it down to that one and this one.

Clothing, Toys, Electronics, Jewelry, Jaclyn Smith - Kmart.com

 

[Ron G]

There are a lot of flatbed scanners on ebay with transparency adapters for very little money.You can buy them for 20 bucks or so plus shipping.I buy Microteks when I am looking for a scanner but there are several others for cheap.I have half a dozen around here picked up on Craigslist or Freecycle.They are everywhere.Ron G

 

[Josh66]

The Epson V600 is about $250, new. You might be able to find one on sale or something.

The V500 (or is it 550?) is cheaper - $220, I think. From what I've heard, it seems to be pretty much the same as the V600, but with different software.

What OS do you run? There are more on Newegg - but some don't run on Windows 7, Mac OS X, etc...

edit
(Epson and HP are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head that usually work on any OS.)

 

[ghache]

I have the epson v500 and i love it, if you dont have 4000$ slides and negatives to do its a really nice unit for the price.

 

[CaranDache]

What is the picture quality of a film negative scan on the Epson comparable to?

 

[Josh66]

What is the picture quality of a film negative scan on the Epson comparable to?

Not sure how to answer that... Compared to another scanner? Digital SLR? Enlarger?

I would say that the quality is 'good' though. Not the best you can get, but good enough that the average person would never know the difference.

Click the link in my signature - almost everything there is film scanned with an Epson V600. Some of it is film scanned with a PlusTech scanner though - which is good too. (Those are older ones, and it says 'PlusTech' as the "camera" in the little exif blurb next to the picture.)

 

[RRYANSMITHH]

I use Windows XP SP2. I think I'm gonna go with the one from K-Mart. It seems decent enough for me.

 

[Josh66]

I use Windows XP SP2. I think I'm gonna go with the one from K-Mart. It seems decent enough for me.

The one you linked to earlier? That doesn't look like it can scan negs - prints only.

edit
It also looks like 4x6 is the largest size it can do - and the resolution is kinda low...

The description says it scans negs, but I don't see how, since you just feed a sheet in... Anyway, if all it can do is 600ppi, that isn't really enough for scanning film. I wouldn't expect to get anything larger than a 4x6 from a 600ppi neg scan - if that.

 

[Proteus617]

I use Windows XP SP2. I think I'm gonna go with the one from K-Mart. It seems decent enough for me.

You are going to regret that. The Kodak is expensive for what it is and you will outgrow it VERY quickly. Low-end Epson scanners are miles ahead of the stuff you are looking at and are the same price brand new. A V300 is $80 direct from Epson and better deals can be found. Used Epsons can be dirt cheap. Everything on my Flickr was scanned on a used Epson Perfection 3170 Photo I picked up for $30.

 

[Josh66]

If all it can do is 600ppi (the K-Mart scanner) ... a scan of a 35mm frame would give you a 566x850 pixel image - max. That's small. Basically, a 4x6 print would be pushing the limits... (If not completely beyond the limits.)


It might be OK if all you cared about was posting stuff on Facebook with zero editing - beyond that, I would keep looking.

 

[CaranDache]

What is the picture quality of a film negative scan on the Epson comparable to?

Not sure how to answer that... Compared to another scanner? Digital SLR? Enlarger?

I would say that the quality is 'good' though. Not the best you can get, but good enough that the average person would never know the difference.

Click the link in my signature - almost everything there is film scanned with an Epson V600. Some of it is film scanned with a PlusTech scanner though - which is good too. (Those are older ones, and it says 'PlusTech' as the "camera" in the little exif blurb next to the picture.)

Compared to a full frame DSLR like a D700 and a non full frame DSLR like a D300. Can it scan medium format film as well?

 

[ultimadrift]

Yes No? I'm thinking of getting this one
Pacific Image Prime-Film 3600u Film Scanner PRIMEFILE 3600U B&H

 

[Josh66]

What is the picture quality of a film negative scan on the Epson comparable to?

Not sure how to answer that... Compared to another scanner? Digital SLR? Enlarger?

I would say that the quality is 'good' though. Not the best you can get, but good enough that the average person would never know the difference.

Click the link in my signature - almost everything there is film scanned with an Epson V600. Some of it is film scanned with a PlusTech scanner though - which is good too. (Those are older ones, and it says 'PlusTech' as the "camera" in the little exif blurb next to the picture.)

Compared to a full frame DSLR like a D700 and a non full frame DSLR like a D300. Can it scan medium format film as well?

Yes, the V600 can do medium format, and the V700/750 can do negs up to 8x10... (It does cost considerably more though)

The answer to your question depends a lot on the film you're scanning. Some films, even in 35mm, will out-perform full frame DSLRs - and other films just suck.
So, the answer is - it depends. Depending on the film you use, it can be either 'better' or 'worse' than digital.

I've never used a full frame DSLR, but if you were going to compare film scans to a crop sensor DSLR, I would take film any day. That's just me though... It seems (to me) like most of the advantages of digital are in areas that I don't care much for (high ISO, for example), so I never bothered to invest in more than a consumer level crop body. Film is more fun anyway.