35mm to digital scanner ... Help please

[Dave Smith]

Moderators: If this is in the wrong forum, please move it or let me know and I will repost and delete this one ... Thx

I have a bunch of slides that I want to digitalize and electronic scanners seem like the way to go.

Has anyone had any experience with any of the following:
Canon CanoScan 4400 Color Image Scanner (Cheapest and largest)
Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400 Film and Slide Scanner (Most high priced)
Plustec Optifilm 7200 Film Scanner (Mid priced and midsized)

I have seen them on E-Bay (new and used) and would bid on one if I knew if it was any good and if I knew what a fair price would be for a used one.

Please advise:
Any experience you may have had with any of these
What you think of the model(s)
What you think would be a good price if used.
Is there something better

I think I am leaning toward the Plustek because of cost new and size.

Thanks in advance for your help.

[danic]

Dave,

Have a look in the film foerum, there are one or two threads like this in there already.

Another idea to buying a scanner is to take them down to a local lab and get them to scan them.

Cheers,
Dan

[freygr]

I use an now old Nikon Coolscan IV. It is not the fastest or the Highest resolution scanner but it does a very good job. You could get refurbished one for about one third of the new cost some time ago. There are some flat bed scanners but there are last time I looked are in the $400-700 range but they will also scan 8 by 10 inch negatives at 3800 or 4800 dpi....

One place to check is Publishing Perfection.

[drg]

Dave,

Your tradeoffs here are going to be cost, quality, and speed. Cost is certainly variable based on source and whether the unit is used.

The Plustek have some Dynamic Range limitations and without practice can produce poor scans.

Of the three you mention, the Minolta will do the best overall scans of slides. It should be far and away the quickest.

The time issue in scanning film or slides is unbelievable until you sit there and do it for days on end. If the slides are damaged or slightly off color due to age, the process can be slower depending on how much 'repair' you do or specify for the software to do for you.

How many slides are you planning on scanning? Are they all the same type of film (Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Veri-C, Provia, etc.)
I am not sure that any of these scanners have software included that effectively allow for successful mixed batches of scanning.

If you should go with the Plustek, be sure to regularly calibrate it and keep it dust free.

More questions?

- C

[GB1]

Dave - watch out for ones that are much less expensive than their competition. I bought a very cheap film scanner many years ago (I forget the name - it was forgettable) and it was a total POS. All kinds of problems and very poor quality scan. I contacted their help line and nothing worked. I junked it. I now have a Nikon Coolscan 9000 which was very expensive, but the quality is incredible. Good luck.

PS - have you considered scanning services too? Might be cheaper if you dont have too many and don't think you will be shooting film again

[Photo-John]

We have a whole film scanner review section with lots of reviews. And a dedicated film scanner is definitely the way to go. The key spec for slide scanning is "dynamic range." That nmber tells you the range of tones a scanner can capture. And with slides that's especially important since they have so much contrast. The scale used to be 0 to 4.0 but about 5 years ago manufacturers started stretching it, which confuses things a bit. But basically, you want a larger number for dynamic range. Just don't expect the scale to be the same for each manufacturer. 4.0 could be the same as 5.0 for a difference maker.

Anyway, here's a link to the reviews:

Read and write film scanner reviews >>

And those of you who own or use film scanners, please post reviews. User reviews are the foundation of PhotographyREVIEW.com. We need your reviews!

[another view]

Whatever you get - make sure it has Digital ICE to remove dust and scratches. I understand it's software that cannot be added later. As the owner of a 35mm film scanner that doesn't have this I highly recommend it due to the amount of time I've spent spotting dust out of what appear to be spotless slides! Most of the newer/better scanners will have it. Like others have mentioned, resolution is only a small part of the story - much like with digital cameras. An inexpensive 8mp pocket-sized camera won't have much in common with an 8mp DSLR...

[freygr]

In the lastest I can get (March) Digital Photographer (British). There was a review the Epson Perfection V700 Photo came out on top of the Nikon Coolsan 5000 ED and the Canon Cano Scan 8800F. I myself have considered purchasing this Epson scanner to replace my aging Epson 1200 Photo.

If you are purchasing on ebay, I would say look at the Nikon Coolscan IV ED and purchase the Auto Slide Feeder. If you do purchase one make sure that the mirror is clean! (of dust, loss of sharpness, I had to clean my scanners mirror)

[another view]

the Epson Perfection V700 Photo came out on top of the Nikon Coolsan 5000 ED

The V700 is a flatbed scanner and the Coolscan 5000 is a dedicated 35mm film scanner. I know the flatbeds have gotten better, but wouldn't have guessed this result. I found the magazine's website but the article doesn't appear to be online, do you have a link?

[Photo-John]

Whatever you get - make sure it has Digital ICE to remove dust and scratches. I understand it's software that cannot be added later. As the owner of a 35mm film scanner that doesn't have this I highly recommend it due to the amount of time I've spent spotting dust out of what appear to be spotless slides! Most of the newer/better scanners will have it.

Thanks for mentioning Digital ICE. It is invaluable - unless you really like spending hours cloning dust and scratches out of your scanned images

Digital ICE is actually a hardware and software system. That's why it can't be added later. It scans the surface of the film separately from the red, green, and blue scans. It then identifies and removes any dust or scratch information. And it works really, really well.

[drg]

SilverFast software by LaserSoft Imaging is the other big Dust, Scratch and adjustment product worth mentioning. SilverFast is more configurable than Digital ICE. Digital-ICE is really good for similar slides and SilverFast seems a lot better for damaged or discoloured transparencies.

SilverFast is software and can be added to many, not all, higher end scanners including some of the Nikons.

The flatbed v. dedicated slide scanner question is further complicated by some of the new Microtek flatbed scanners that have 'glassless' scanning for slides and film. Early testing indicates they are the equal or superior of many of the current as well as past generation of dedicated scanners. They also solve a deskspace issue for many shops. The new ones range from ~$300-~$2500(A3) and come with all kinds of software.

Braun makes a production scanner for a little over a $1000 that just eats slides. It looks like a Rollei Slide projector and in fact, uses the same trays as the Braun projector. Not for the meek or underpowered computer user either!

The Dynamic Range (DR) rating was complicated by Nikon in the consumer field when they tried to introduce Density Range measurements to Scanners. This is a similar but slightly different number from the Dynamic Number and came from earlier Laser scanners and drum scanning. Higher is still better.

I still am curious as to the number of slides you really want/need to scan. One more consideration is that when scanning it is best to scan at the highest meaningful resolution so that you don't have to come back and do it over. That means storage space! Enough slides and figure a USB or other external type storage device. Scan TIFF and back them up!

A small light box and loupe might be worth $30-75 to look at the slides to see how many you need to take time to scan.

100 slides is a weekend. 1000 slides is a month.

Best of luck and do visit the film forum as scanning is a recurring topic.

[Franglais]

Thanks for mentioning Digital ICE. It is invaluable - unless you really like spending hours cloning dust and scratches out of your scanned images

Digital ICE is actually a hardware and software system. That's why it can't be added later. It scans the surface of the film separately from the red, green, and blue scans. It then identifies and removes any dust or scratch information. And it works really, really well.

I have scanned tens of thousands of my film images with the Nikon Coolscan IV. I haven't finished my collection yet - I figure I have another couple of years to go but the remaining images are a boring part of my life so I can't be bothered yet.

The Coolscan IV has digital ICE. This means that there is an infra-red light source in the scanner, used to make an extra pre-scan. Why? Well the dyes used in colour films are transparent in infra-red. The only thing the scanner sees when it does the pre-scan is the dust. So in post-processing it clones out the dust and you are usually left with a spotless image.

BUT - two types of film are NOT transparent to infra-red and ICE has to be disabled to get a (spotty) image. They are:

- Kodachrome
- Conventional black & white (Tri-X, HP5, etc)

With these films you have to use Silverfast which I have not found to be very effective

[f5fstop]

The V700 is a flatbed scanner and the Coolscan 5000 is a dedicated 35mm film scanner. I know the flatbeds have gotten better, but wouldn't have guessed this result. I found the magazine's website but the article doesn't appear to be online, do you have a link?

Epson flatbed scanners that are also noted to be capable of scanning in slides and negatives, have a part (usually the inside of the top) that can be removed. Once removed there is a light source that allows light to be shinned through a slide or negative vs. reflected off the media.
I have an older Epson that has this and the scans are just as good as my Nikon Coolscan 4000 ED.

[freygr]

The V700 is a flatbed scanner and the Coolscan 5000 is a dedicated 35mm film scanner. I know the flatbeds have gotten better, but wouldn't have guessed this result. I found the magazine's website but the article doesn't appear to be online, do you have a link?

No I don't have the link I have the printed magazine. But I was looking at the model do to the size of negative it will scan 8 x 10 inch. There choice was not on quality alone, and the Epson scanner has more resolution than the old CoolScan I currently have.

[another view]

There choice was not on quality alone, and the Epson scanner has more resolution than the old CoolScan I currently have.

I guess that's what I was wondering - did a new flatbed scanner beat a dedicated 35mm film scanner (assuming we're comparing 35mm film in both cases)? I couldn't believe that and apparently it has not happened. The specs, facts and figures tell a story that should be considered, but the quality of a scan isn't just about numbers. Maybe it is just the software that's gotten so much better lately - but the end result is my concern.