35mm film scanner recommendation

[allenbirnbach]

I friend called me and asked for a recommendation for a scanner.  He's an amateur, but shoots a lot of travel imagery.  He's looking for a way to get his legacy files into the computer primarily for small prints, and email capability, but he is looking for quality. His work is primarily in slide film.  I don't think he wants to go for the expense of a Nikon 5000. Any recommendations of current machines would be appreciated.

[Jonathan Ratzlaff]

For what he wants, a slide copying attachment would work as well as anything else.   May take a bit of setting up but once done, will work quickly with no additional equipment than his digital camera.

[plusminusgurkan]

I am looking for a 35mm film scanner as well. However, I need it for professional use, but I hope it's okay to use this thread anyway. I'm not looking for the absolute top of the line, but something reasonably price with reasonable quality. So, I wonder if anyone can recommend a good scanner, in the sub-$1000 price range. Of course, if it can scan medium format it would be a great bonus, but judging from the limited research I have made, I think that's not an option in that price range.

Also, I wonder how flatbed scanners compare to real film scanners. Using a flatbed would let me scan medium format as well, but with what loss of qualty?

[whawn]

For both cases, I would think an Epson Perfection V700 or Perfection V750-M scanner would fill the bill.  I would have suggested Microtek, but they seem to have faded into the background noise.

For really good results, I'd go with the Nikon 9000 but that might be over-kill.

For stunning and excellent, the Imacons are beatable only by a true drum scanner.

Walt

[situgrrl]

I'm using a V750 at the moment because it is about the only game in town available new - and second hand Nikons have sky rocketed.  It's ok with the film holders.  It's good with the fluid mount adaptor.  Siverfast is a nightmare though.  I think an FF DSLR with macro lens/decent slide copier might at this stage be better quality wise - and certainly from a file size/manipulation point of view.

[The Vulcan]

I've just acquired a Minolta Dimage Multi Pro which covers  35mm - 6x9.

Awesome quality all the way through

Seen a few on Ebay at c. US$1500

I also use a V700 with the Betterscan MF holders which does a superlative job on MF but just doesn't cut the cake on 35mm.

How about a Konica Minolta 5400 11? Awesome Dmax and reputedly the best for 35mm ONLY

[tsjanik]

How about a Konica Minolta 5400 11? Awesome Dmax and reputedly the best for 35mm ONLY

I have a 9000 and a DSE 5400.  I kept the 5400 for two reasons: the increased resolution (5400 vs. 4000ppi) is worthwhile for sharp, slow 35mm films , e.g. K25 or KII if you're really old) and the Minolta is much better than the Nikon with Kodachrome if ICE is used.  The Nikon produces a sort of worm track pattern that is absent in the 5400 scans.  The Minolta is slow and really should be manually focused  so I use it only for slides when I want the best quality short of a drum scan.

[David Good]

Many of the current top of the line flatbeds can produce some very good results. If a dedicated, inexpensive film (35mm) scanner is preferred, the Canon FS4000 might fit the bill for you. They should be available new and used for a reasonable price.

Dave