Zoner Photo Studio X: The only photo editor you'll ever need - save 25%

Film scanner

CatMouse 18 115 Russian Federation
31 Oct 2004 8:29AM
Hi Everybody!

I want to scan my color negative films in to the digital images (with an opportunity of a conclusion on the printer further).

What do you think about the "Multidevices" with scanner(2400x4800 res.) built-in like EPSON RX600? Does this is a really " smart solution "??? (or i must buy the film scanner only, like Minolta Dimage Dualscan IV, 3200 res.)

Thank you for any Help!

stevie 17 1.2k 2 United Kingdom
31 Oct 2004 10:05AM
I have no personal experience of a 'multidevice' but I do have a Dualscan IV which I bought recently to start digitising some of my last 30 years of shots. It's very easy to use, relatively cheap and produces very acceptable scans from 35 mm slides and negatives (the most recent two shots in my portfolio were taken in 1972 & 1982 respectively and scanned on this machine)
keith selmes 18 7.4k 1 United Kingdom
31 Oct 2004 10:28AM
Its a difficult question to answer adequately, because it depends a lot on your expections. Some people are very happy scanning 35mm with a 1600 dpi flatbed, and this RX600 should be at least as good. Others will say you need at least 4000dpi for acceptable results.
Personally I've used an epson 2450 flatbed for 35mm, which should be very similar to the RX600. Its sort of OK, but I wasn't really happy with it. A Nikon Coolscan at 4000dpi is entirely different, and very very acceptable.

I would expect that, because of design and construction factors, you would get better results from a dedicated film scanner, even if the resolution were the same. In fact I suspect the film scanners will actually do 3200, whereas in practice the RX600 probably won't live up to its technical specification, which seems to be 2400.

Roughly speaking, if you just want some reasonable snapshots, its probably a good solution.
If you're picky about your photo quality, it'll probably be a disapointment.

Hope that helps more than it confuses.
CatMouse 18 115 Russian Federation
31 Oct 2004 11:21AM
Steve, Keith
Thanks for answers!

Keith, thanks for a detailed explanation, I already start to understand something in this business.
It turns out so, that various resolutions of scanners DO NOT MEAN various photographic quality. Flatbed scanners, having even the greater resolution (for RX600 up to 4800), can
to produce in a result a picture of the worse quality, than at Nikon (4000) or Minolta (3200).
Means to receive comprehensible photographic quality, it is necessary to take into account still any parameters(not only DPI)? Or I always should buy only the film-scanner for a film?

Yes, it will seems what to receive the unequivocal answer to this question difficultly...
keith selmes 18 7.4k 1 United Kingdom
31 Oct 2004 7:04PM
The RX600 specification say 2400x4800.
It says also optical resolution is 2400, and mechanical resolution is 4800. I think that means you really only get 2400 dpi. However I am not the worlds greatest expert on this!

Also a flatbed scanner is not likely to have as good a mechanism as a film scanner, and I think the focus on a flatbed will be fixed.

A good film scanner will have a more precise mechanism, and a better lens, and it may be able to adjust the focus before scanning. That certainly is the case with the Nikon scanners.

The flatbeds and multi devices obviously offer convenience, in scanning paper as well as film, and may be better for office use, even perhaps for home use, but if you want high
quality scans, a film scanner will usually be better.

This is true for 35mm anyway, as we said in another thread, some flatbeds are fine for medium format.
mlewis 17 1.5k United Kingdom
1 Nov 2004 10:31AM
A dedicated film scanner will give better results when scanning film than a flatbed scanner due to it being designed specifically for the task. When scanning film the optical resolution needs to be taken into account with the dmax value. The dmax should be as high as possible to get as much detail as possible from dark areas while retaing the highlights.
keith selmes 18 7.4k 1 United Kingdom
1 Nov 2004 10:56AM
And someone has started a handy thread about dmax with a detailed explanation.
CatMouse 18 115 Russian Federation
1 Nov 2004 2:30PM
Now, due to your answers I have already understood that the film scanner (and still I need to keep within the budget up to 400 US dollars) therefore is necessary for me to choose it was between flatbed RX600 (it would be desirable to update still and printer Epson 895) and film Minolta DualScan IV. Quite right, in this scanner the system of autofocussing which is not present on one flatbed scanner is applied. Moreover, here (unfortunately, only in Russian) mod_id=492 there are responses about his work. At scanning and the subsequent printing as the author writes, distinctions between scanning the shot and an initial negative at a print on A4 it is not revealed. However, any strips in the green channel of color are observed at scanning. However, there is too small information. Any responses about work RX600 to me to find it was not possible, but I have already chosen Minolta DualScan IV.

P.S. With me have remained my good KIEV-4 camera (ex-Contax) with the HELIOS-103 53mm/1.8, and JUPITER-12 25mm/2.8 lenses, also ZENIT 12XL camera with HELIOS "Fish Eye" (16mm/2.8) and HELIOS-44-7 50mm/2.0 lenses. It, certainly not Canon, but they photograph very well, and me not It would be desirable for them to throw out. The most interesting, that the KIEV-4 camera has been bought by my grandfather(when i was a boy)!!!


Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.