-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Film Scanners.
- Thread starter agoh
- Start date
W
Waldemar
Guest
4000 ED and Velvia gave me some REALLY bad mood as well. Clogged shadows, blown-out lights, Velvia is horror for scanners. It´s not as bad with medium format transies, no idea why, they are much easier to scan.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
'There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept'
Waldemar
http://www.pbase.com/haak
http://www.photo-haak.com
http://www.images-of-tuscany.com
I rather prefer to buy a 100 macro than a scanner. My plan was to but the scanner, use for about a month (madly) and sell it on Ebay. Since I have not seen that great of a result, I'll use the 10D for it (and buy the macro). My concern was convenience and speed of scanning, but if I get it setup right, it should go fast.
Alfred
Alfred
Ant suggestions?
any suggestions?
kalahari
Veteran Member
24Mpixels x3. These are higher quality pixels with R,G, and B data at every location. No interpolation involved.
Slide scan for me takes about 30 minutes each since I have Digital ICE turned on and do a 16 pass scan to reduce the noise levels.
Slide scan for me takes about 30 minutes each since I have Digital ICE turned on and do a 16 pass scan to reduce the noise levels.
kalahari
Veteran Member
Imaging resourse keeps saying that. This problem does not exist on all units. I have been very lucky and do not have this problem. Same is true with scanner my friend has. How lucky do you feel? You may or may not be luck enough to get a scanner that has the banding problem.
Doctor Bird
Veteran Member
That's great advice. I did the same with my G2 using closeup lenses and a good light box. Got high res scans with some expected edge problems. But now I have a 10D and an expected macro so the problems should go away. Once the hardware is configured the "scan time" is basically the shutter lag time of the camera.
And you're right, for the price of a good, slow scanner one can get an excellent macro plus more.
Marq.
MSChecan
And you're right, for the price of a good, slow scanner one can get an excellent macro plus more.
Marq.
--If so then use that - buy a cheap lightbox (even a £20 one will do)
and a Macro lens like the Canon 100 or Sigma 105 (Better buy than a
slide scanner in the long run) and use that .. it's less convenient
but you should get great results, I managed bigger than 8X10s with
a 2Mp 1999 vintage Nikon 950 , a D30 or D60 or 10D would be a
breeze and you get a neat macro lens to shoot bugs and flowers with
in the Summer and use as a quality prime as well
--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist
My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855
MSChecan
kalahari
Veteran Member
I believe the 2800dpi scanner would kick 10D's ass. Look at the DiMAGE Scan Dual III from Minolta. It is an excellent starting scanner and much better than anything you will get from 10D.
Think of the DiMAGE Scan Dual III as a 10Mpixel (x3 foveon quality pixels). It cost the same as the alternative solutions with much better results.
Think of the DiMAGE Scan Dual III as a 10Mpixel (x3 foveon quality pixels). It cost the same as the alternative solutions with much better results.
Isn't even near the speed. Getting into costs I am surprised nobody has mentioned this scanner.
http://www.microtekusa.com/as2500f.html
Haven't even seen too many reviews of it
http://www.microtekusa.com/as2500f.html
Haven't even seen too many reviews of it
Supposedly this one is pretty sharp because its negative/slide scanner does not have any glass between it like a normal flat bed scanner. I have some impressive scans from the Epson 3200 in comparison to slide scanners.
Sure, try sending some test slides to a few labs and pick the one you like best. I must say I have neverd scanned film online, but quite a few of printing services do that. Ofoto.com for instance. Do a search on this forum with keywords "pringing services". I used to keep track of them, but about a year ago settled with ofoto.com for prints, sold my printer, and "lived happily everafter"
)--
Eugueny
That is an interesting idea! Anybody has done that? Can I see some results? (URL) Thank you.
--
Eugueny
--
Eugueny
J
John Kim
Guest
I haven't seen any direct comparisons between a D60/10D vs. a slide scanner. However, I have seen comparisons of a Nikon Coolpix 950 vs. a slide scanner, and a Nikon Coolpix 950 vs. a D60:
http://www.dcresource.com/SlideCopier/index.html
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=4672115
The primary advantage of a slide scanner IMHO is the increased dynamic range (all the good ones let you adjust the scanning light brightness up or down to handle off exposure), resolution, and the automatic dust removal. Primary advantage of using a camera is the speed, simplicity, and smaller file size. The speed advantage is reversed though if you have dusty slides/negs.
http://www.dcresource.com/SlideCopier/index.html
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=4672115
The primary advantage of a slide scanner IMHO is the increased dynamic range (all the good ones let you adjust the scanning light brightness up or down to handle off exposure), resolution, and the automatic dust removal. Primary advantage of using a camera is the speed, simplicity, and smaller file size. The speed advantage is reversed though if you have dusty slides/negs.
dewayne howse
Forum Enthusiast
There is an article in shutterbug either feb or march 2003
Stefan Klein
Leading Member
I have one,it's great.Much lower shadow noise than the Canon 4000.It comes with Silverfast,a VERY good scanning software.
Stefan
Stefan
Adam-T
Veteran Member
I shot 3 rolls of chromes for a client on thursday, when they have them processed, some will need converting to Digital (REAL 16mm shots too 
so I'll test the 100 Macro, I did quite well using a 50mm prime and tubes but you lot a lot of frame size due to the cropping of the soft corners tubes bring
--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist
My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855
so I'll test the 100 Macro, I did quite well using a 50mm prime and tubes but you lot a lot of frame size due to the cropping of the soft corners tubes bring--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist
My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855
Wayne J
Well-known member
I have used the Scan Dual II (the prior model) for a couple years. In terms of just pure image size, yes its about a 10 MP. Enlargements up to the maximum i can print on an epson 1270 can look good (13 by 19 inches). However, Im pretty sure that one shoudl not expect im age qaulity as high as lets say an 1Ds file (I wish I had a 1Ds to compare!). The scans just are not as clean as samples I've seen posted from the high end DSLRs.
Having said that, for $300 the Scan Dual III looks like a great deal. I've alos seen the Scan Dual II advertised in Phtoshop User magazine for only $200 --
Wayne
--I shot 3 rolls of chromes for a client on thursday, when they have
them processed, some will need converting to Digital (REAL 16mm
shots too
50mm prime and tubes but you lot a lot of frame size due to the
cropping of the soft corners tubes bring
--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist
My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855
Eugueny
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum