DeanerNiker Loc: Lakewood, Colorado

I am having a difficult time finding a scanner that will scan 120 or 620 negative film. Everything I see is for 35mm or slides & I already have one of those. I prefer something around the $200 or so but am not having any luck. I have many old B&W's that I would love to scan. I had an old HP that did that but they have no updated drivers for it. HP, IMHO has taken a downhill 'slide' (pardon the pun) with their products and I see nothing to indicate any improvement in the future. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Dean

GC likes NIKON Loc: East Greenwich, Rhode Island

Epson V500 refurbished direct from Epson !! Around $100.00, no sales tax & sometimes free shipping. I got one on the recommendation of another UGG'er and absolutely love it !!! Scans everything !!

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

I use a few Epson scanners at work. I'm impressed with the V series. You might take a look at the V500. http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/jsp/Product.do?sku=B11B189011#whats-in-the-box


GC, you have good taste!

DeanerNiker Loc: Lakewood, Colorado

Thanks GC; good to get an actually user review. Great info!

DeanerNiker Loc: Lakewood, Colorado

Thanks goofie, and suggesting the same scanner. That tells me a lot. Appreciate it.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Who??? Hmmmm...

DeanerNiker Loc: Lakewood, Colorado

:thumbup: I get it; thank you too MT. My Epson is on it's way.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

You will find a lot of satisfied V500 users on here. I started recommending it almost a year ago.

Newfie-1 Loc: Ontario-Canada

I use a CanoScan 8800F and it scans everything

PhotoArtsLA Loc: Boynton Beach

The Epson V750-M is pretty remarkable in its scanning ability.

I have an Imacon Flextight scanner, which costs about the same as a compact car, and scans all things to 4x5 inch with impressive psuedo drum technology. The problem is, it use the ancient SCSI protocol... But, I could scan into the gigabyte file size with that thing.

The Imacon is the thing glowing at the right of frame in the shot below.

Imacon Scanner

PaulDBowen Loc: Belfair, WA, USA

What some people do not realize is that a scanner is actually a digital camera and, as such, has the same limitations.

The quality of the scan is like the quality of the image the camera takes. A point and shoot camera is capable of anywhere from 1 or 2 megapixels up to 20 megapixels or more, but point and shoot cameras generally have very small (physically) sensors. The result is lower image quality due to noise, etc. It is same with flat bed or sheet-fed scanners. All of the V-series Epson scanners have sensors that are similar in size to point and shoot cameras. That is why they are so cheap in comparison to a drum scanner such as the one shown here. A drum scanner is like a DSLR compared to the Epson V-series scanners. If you really want inexpensive "scans" of your 120mm or 35mm transparencies, simply use a macro 1:1 digital camera and lense and a slide holder/copier and photograph it. DIY devices are simple to construct and will yield much better results then the inexpensive scanners. And they are faster.

I repaired scanners for years and have done professional photography since the 1950s. Just speaking from experience.

kerbscustom Loc: Valley Center, CA

I've been using the Epson V-700 for a couple of years now and I'm impressed with everything but the speed. Higher rez scans of medium or large format negs can take 5 minutes or more. On the plus side, it comes with film carriers for 35mm, 120, 4x5 and slides.

Mudshark Loc: Illinois

Ditto the Epson scanners...most excellent...I use a Epson V 750 Pro...and love it.

Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

Thanks for the tip. It's outstanding.
How would that compare to a scanner with a wet mounted negative? Or is the wetmounting only to get the negative to lay flat?

PaulDBowen Loc: Belfair, WA, USA

I am not familar with wet mounting; however, due to the shallow depth of field of all scanner cameras, the flatter the film the better. This is another reason (in addition to the larger sensors) why drum type scanners are so much better (and more expensive) than consumer-priced sheet-fed or flat bed scanners - they hold the film absoloutely flat during scanning. One thing of note: in scanning a transparency, you do not have to deal with color casts associated with film negatives. With negatives, processing software is required to correct for the color casts. That is why negatives provide a wider contrast range than transparencies. On the other hand, while transparencies have a more limited dynamic range in exposure, the colors are "true" and do not require post processing in that regard.

If you just want a digital record of the film (negative or transparency), inexpensive scanners, such as the Epson V-series work fine, even with their small sensors. But if you want a more accurate digital copy of your film (negative or transparency) that you can seriously post process in LightRoom or Photoshop, you really only have two choices: use a drum scanner (which means send it to a professional lab for scanning) or use your DSLR (APC-size sensor or full frame) and a true 1:1 macro lens to photograph the negative or slide using back lighting, such as taping or attaching the film to a light table or even your computer screen (blank of course, just to provide the even light source). The end result is, as with any kind of digital photograhy/scanning, highly dependent on the size of the sensor. Epson scanners typically have a 1/2.23", smaller than a postage stamp. As a result the pixels are cramped and compromised. A DSLR has of course a much larger size sensor. It is not just the megapixels, it is sensor size.