Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Digital scanner for MF slides / negs  (Read 6346 times)
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834


« Reply #40 on: March 08, 2010, 11:30:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: MichaelHCothran
While the Epson V700/V750 are good scanners, they are no match for a dedicated film scanner. The Imacons are the top choice, but will most likely be out of price range, unless your funds are limitless.
Other than the Imacon, my suggestion would be the Nikon LS 9000 ED film scanner. I own one, and am very happy with it. One word of caution if/when you buy it - You MUST, and I cannot over-emphasize this - you MUST buy the optional glass carrier for your 120 film. B&H has them for around $250 US. Model # FH-869G. The standard 120 glassless carrier that comes with the scanner is horrible - your film will bow in the middle, yielding a less than acceptable scan. BUY the glass carrier - problem solved.
 The scanner scans @ 4000 ppi, and yields resolution about 9000x11000 pixels for a 6x7 neg, with a file size around 500-550 mb's @ 16 bit. (Just about enough to produce a 24x30" print @ 360 ppi, native resolution.)
Michael H. Cothran
Nashville, Tennessee

I've had better luck with the stock 120 holders than most.  I can get a very nice scan from the regular holder.  I also have the regular glass holder and some Anti Newton glass and optical glass that I use with teh regular holder.  I use all three holders, depending on the condition of the film.  

Now that I don't live in NYC full time, I'm using my 9000 more and more.  It really does a good job.
Logged
Brady
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 59


WWW
« Reply #41 on: March 08, 2010, 12:03:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Chairman Bill
I get the sense that LF is well worth scanning (no surprise there really), but scanned MF might not give me any better results than I get currently from my DLSR. I still hanker after some big Tri-X negs though  

I still say scanned MF(6x7) is better quality than a dslr....at least in my experience....more dynamic range and more room to push the file around in photoshop...those dslr files deteriorate a lot faster than my negs.  not to mention the difference in look due to format size.

i have a 9000 i scan with but, if i had the cash i'd get a creo iqsmart in a heartbeat......not so much a huge difference in sharpness but in the color depth and the smoothness of the tonal gradations....it's like night and day between the nikon and the creo.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad