# Scanner recommendations?



## Actor (Jul 12, 2009)

I'd like to get a scanner for slides and negatives, and perhaps retire my enlarger.  There seem to be a few 5 MegaPixel models that fit my budget, somewhere in the $100 price range.  Does anyone here have a recommendation for a specific model, or advice on ones to avoid?


----------



## Josh66 (Jul 12, 2009)

I have (and like) the plustek OpticFilm 7300, but I think it will be a little beyond your budget (around $250, I think).

I think there's a newer model of it out now, so the price may have dropped.

It can only do 35mm (slides & negs), so if you shoot any larger formats, you may want to look around more.

I have been very happy with it.  The only bad thing is that it can be kinda slow, but I guess you're going to have to deal with that on any high resolution scanner...


----------



## Actor (Jul 12, 2009)

O|||||||O said:


> I have (and like) the plustek OpticFilm 7300, but I think it will be a little beyond your budget (around $250, I think).
> 
> I think there's a newer model of it out now, so the price may have dropped.
> 
> ...



$209.95 after rebate from BHPhotoVideo.  That would be at the top end of my range.

35mm is all I need.


----------



## Josh66 (Jul 12, 2009)

...Same price at Newegg.


----------



## Josh66 (Jul 12, 2009)

There is also an older model of this scanner that may be worth looking into.  I think it's the 7200.  As far as I know the only differences are the color of the scanner, and the included software.


----------



## Dwig (Jul 12, 2009)

If your budget can be stretched to the $200 range you should also consider the EPSON V500 Epson Perfection V500 Photo Scanner, Overview - Product Information - Epson America, Inc.

While I use v700, my brother and his wife use a v500 that delivers very good results for them. The v500 can handle 35mm and 120 in addition to prints.


----------



## JC1220 (Jul 13, 2009)

A while back I was hunting for a scanner to do a huge job of scanning old family slides, and at that time I was looking at the Epson and Microtek scanners. Microtek is gone now, and the Epson's are a great choice as mentioned above.

But, I didn't make my purchase until recently and ended up buying an HP Scanjet G4050 for about $160 at Newegg. 

I have about 500 slides done and have to say it is a great scanner doing 16 slides at a wack at 300dpi with a 400% Scale takes about 4 mins to scan them all, and the output quality is excellent. Good control settings that can be saved, decent software on board obvioulsy PS is better. Has negative and slide holders for up to 4x5. The down side on the slide holder is that it just separates them and does not hold them flat, if you have a slightly warped slide it can kick the focus out a touch.

For what I am doing, cataloging a massive amout of slides, it is perfect.


----------



## Actor (Jul 13, 2009)

JC1220 said:


> A while back I was hunting for a scanner to do a huge job of scanning old family slides, ...
> 
> For what I am doing, cataloging a massive amout of slides, it is perfect.



That's pretty much what I need to do.  When my wife and I were first married (40 years last month) we shot slides exclusively.  We had a little Olympus 35mm half frame that would take 72 frames per roll.  The labs charged us by the frame and back then prints cost a lot more than slides.  The savings was significant.   We want to go through all of them and get them digitized because setting up the projector is just too much of a pain.


----------



## a_spaceman (Jul 20, 2009)

epson perfection v300. cheap, simple and effective. fits perfectly in your 100 quid budget, too.
won't deliver professional results, but works better than you'd think.
here's an interesting link about it - Just got an Epson V300. First impressions! - Rangefinderforum.com
as you can see, for a fraction of the price it delivers well over a fraction of the quality, which is actually pretty damn good.

another option on the same price range would be a canon canoscan 5600f, but i can't say much as i don't have any experience with these. as far as i've heard these are fine working units too, but tend to deliver warmer, somewhat "yellowish" tones compared to the epson. but again, that's what i've hear.

alternatively, try to look on flickr for 5600f or v300 and look at the results. i'm sure either will do the job fine, without costing you much at all.

good luck with the scanning, it will take you quite a while! and congratulations for your 40 years together.


----------



## DSPhotography (Jul 21, 2009)

a_spaceman said:


> epson perfection v300. cheap, simple and effective. fits perfectly in your 100 quid budget, too.
> won't deliver professional results, but works better than you'd think.



I was just about to post the same thing. I have an Epson V200 (the  model the V300 replaced) and it works wonderfully. You can get more info on it on Epson's website. Side note about the ratings on it on that link, Every person gave it 5 stars except one person, who gave it a low rating because he didn't like the software it comes with.

If you want some examples:





Ilford Delta 100 scanned at 4800dpi (max is 9600). No post processing other than dust removal and resizing to be "web friendly"





Fuji Reala 100 also scanned at 4800dpi and also no PP other than dust removal and resizing.

It does great work, especially for $100


----------



## Sangetsu (Jul 24, 2009)

I recently upgraded to an Epson 750 (it scans large sheet film), but I used to use a Canoscan 8400f. You can find these used any day of the week for less than $50, and they are worth every penny. A new Canon scanner is not much more expensive, and is completely adequate for 35mm film.


----------

