Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: ryanstrong on July 31, 2012, 04:11:05 am
-
I just got a Mamiya 645, this is my first medium format and first film camera. There is a great local 120mm film developer in to which is great but I'd love to scan my own images.
Any suggestions? I've been looking some Epsons. Would love your all thoughts!
-
To get the best out of medium format, you might want to look into dedicated film scanners, not flat-beds. The best are Minolta Multi Pro and Nikon 9000.
-
old Imacon or Hasselblad FT will be ok :)
-
NIkon 9000 or 8000 coolscan work great. I recommend VueScan for best results.
-
Depends on your budget. I've had them all, almost. The Nikon 8000 or 9000 is fantastic. 9000 is faster than the 8000. The Imacons are fantastic. I had an 848. The Microtek 120TF was pretty good too, but no ICE dust removal. The Epson v700/v750 are the best bang for the buck. They get you about 70% of the Nikon/Microtek scans, are easy to load with ScanScience holders, and are quite fast. They work a treat on 4x5 and 8x10.
VueScan, as mentioned above, is odd but effective. Silverfast is aweful, in my opinion.
Plustek is coming out with a new 120 scanner in September. Looks fantastic. Price unknown.
Which ever one you get, know this: scanning sucks the life out of you.
Right now I use the Epson v750 for proofing and smaller print sizes. Quality is good enough for most magazine editorials, even doubletrucks. I will then send anything I really like out to be drum scanned.
Good luck!
-
You could start out with an Epson v600 and see how you like the whole scanning thing.
I have seen surprisingly good results with the v600.
IF your budget is a bit higher you can get the Epson v750 using SilverFast SE Plus 8
If you are shooting negatives these two will do you just fine.
On the other hand if you are shooting transparencys you will get
better results with a high end scanner from a high end lab or printing company.
Keep in mind I'm talking about a Crossfield the size of a car.
The Epson v750 is a game changer. Very high quality scans as well as wet scanning.
The Nikon does not do wet scanning as a stock option.
Here is an example of a scan with the Epson v750.
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5250/5356464560_f46a54d63a_b.jpg)
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5142/5738647019_08d35d415e_z.jpg)
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5299/5417854016_f1a10a64ae_b.jpg)
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5297/5417246191_cf601ffe23_b.jpg)
[img]
While I normally wet scan the above scans were done dry scan. So you can expect slightly better results
if you wet scan.
Keep in mind that the images I posted were shot with the Fuji gx680.
No other MF reflex camera comes close to it's quality when shooting film.
Personally I find the Nikon scanners over rated. I've had both the dedicated 35mm and the 8000.
Never liked the tonal reproduction. Vuescan is so so IMO.
SilverFast SE Plus 8 is far better, but the company is not nice to deal with and has a censored (they say moderated)
forum.
Stay away from drum scanners unless you are shooting transparancys.
-
Plustek is coming out with a new 120 scanner in September. Looks fantastic. Price unknown.
Two Uk suppliers are taking pre-orders at £1,999
http://www.morrisphoto.co.uk/Product...oryid~145.html
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-plustek-120-opticfilm-medium-format-scanner/p1531677
-
Just curious, and quite ignorant about better-quality scanning: what is "wet scanning" (what fluid - water?) and why do it this way? Are you matching the refractive index of the fluid to the refractive index of the glass, analogous to using oil on high-power (60x and 100x) microscope objectives?
My day job is pathology, btw, so microscope objectives are my most frequently used "glass". I have some film legacy negatives and slides which don't need the ultimate in scanning quality. Many of these are pathology gross photographs I would like to use again for teaching (in powerpoint lectures). I have fantasized about going the 4" x 5" route in my avocational photography someday - currently I have digital SLR, but I used to do my own darkroom work in the distant past.
-
At what resolution were these scans done?
-
Hi,
I use a Minolta Dimage Scan Multi Pro for scanning MF slide film. I have written down my experience in two articles:
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/59-sony-alpha-900-vs-67-analogue-round-2
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/16-pentax67velvia-vs-sony-alpha-900
In short, I did not find the scanning experience very rewarding. It is possible to make good scans from film, but it is hard work. You can buy a full frame DSLR and a good lens for the price of an MF scanner (like mine) and for the price of an Imacon you can get an MF camera. Some excellent scanners can now and than be found on E-bay.
The first article also compares with high end drum scan.
Best regards
Erik
-
old Imacon or Hasselblad FT will be ok :)
New Hasselblad FT (Flextight)?!
http://www.hasselblad.com/products/scanners.aspx
-
You can always find a used in excellent condition ;)
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/n4ysdj5v26qj61s/Cn3Wo-7cQh
-
old Imacon or Hasselblad FT will be ok :)
Short of finding an old drum scanner (and the hassle of finding old hardware to driver very old software to drive it), I’d agree a FlexTight is a great option. If that is out of your budget, the Epson V750 is surprisingly good if you wet mount.
-
I think the Minolta Multi Pro is a great scanner and has the best holders for keeping film flat without using a glass holder, I rented a Nikon 8000 once and thought the non glass holder was terrible making the glass holder a must, which brings with it 4 extra surfaces to keep dust off.
-
stay away from the epson v500. the results I've seen with the v700/v750 look awesome.
I got the nikon 9000 and love it for 35mm, but on fresh MF, the film curls too much for the non-glass holder. So then I got the dust nightmare glassholder. The results as amazingly flat, but I get newton rings 100% of the time. People say to use the masking, but I haven't figure that out yet so honestly, I just stopped shooting MF for the most part and just shoot 35mm now.
-
I use a V700 w/ betterscanning.com holder + glass. I am overall satisfied with the results, and scan b&w, c41, and e6 generally @ 2400dpi with Silverfast 8 SE. I am hopeful the new Plustek scanner will be a leap forward in quality, but will be waiting to see some hard tests first before spending any more money on scanners.
-
The Minolta medium format glassless film holder is awesome for keeping 645/6x6 film flat, my scans are almost dust free and no newton rings. When I need to scan anything bigger I just scan in sections then stitch back together.
-
I agree with TMARK, the imacon/hasselbalds are fantastic, Epson 750 is great with 4x5 & 8x10, Silverfast is awful and scanning sucks the life out of you.
I used to rent time with an imacon 848 (the best solution for me) but could only do about 4hrs at a time before losing my mind. I thought the imacon software was far superior to all the others - don't overlook this - and I liked the fact that the scanner was kept serviced and calibrated at the lab, something that is not cheap.
Renting a scanner also helped me become a better editor! Time is money ;-)
-Nik