File :-(, x, )
Liquefied !!CF1+3tSFCce
Hey film /p/hags,

Those of you who scan your negatives/positives at home - what kinds of scanners do you use? If you remember my thread from a couple days ago about the Rolleiflex, I'm going to start using it pretty often for portraiture stuff and I'd like to be able to get pretty good quality scans from the 120 film. My budget would be somewhere around $100-150.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 20DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsPhotographerunknownImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:01:17 18:28:22Exposure Time1/1000 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/8.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length200.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width600Image Height600RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Canon CanoScan 8600F. Was $168 new, as I recall
>> Anonymous
>>156955
i'm interested in a scanner as well, but only hear real bad about flatbed scanners that also do film. can you post a scan?
>> heman
OP, what were you thinking when you included so much of such a terrible sky
>> Anonymous
>>156970
Looks like water to me
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>156967
Sure.

This shot was taken on Velvia 100 with a half-frame SLR.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
Another from the same half-frame Velvia roll.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
Canon P&S film camera, Fuji Superia 200. Full 35mm frame this time..
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
Ilford Delta 3200 shot with my Rebel film SLR, probably 50/1.8.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
Velvia 100, I believe. 120-format. Taken with my old Yashica A TLR. Slight blue tint was from the shitty developing job done by Delaware camera, not from the scanner.

(Possible it was my fault, too, but I don't think so)
>> Anonymous
>>157011

Boring image, BEAUTIFUL grain.
I <3 Illford!

Also <3 half-frame cameras.
Always wanted one of those...
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>157016
Yeah, I love the XBOXHUEG grain on Delta 3200.

My half-frame is a Yashica Samurai X3.0 SLR. It's an SLR with a non-removable zoom lens, no manual controls other than "Fire the flash" or "Don't fire the flash", and a plain glass (rather than ground glass) viewfinder. Looks like a video camera rather than a still film camera. The young lady in the Delta3200 shot bought it for me as a present.
>> Anonymous
Little bit of a thread hijack, but how do focal lengths work with half-frame cameras?

Is a 25mm lens like a 50mm? Just a 2x crop factor?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>157020
I believe so, yeah.
>> Anonymous
So why does this list a 42mm lens as being normal for the Pen F:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympus_Pen_F#Lens_manufactured_for_the_Olympus_Pen_F_System.3D
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>157022
Because I'm full of shit, obviously. :)

Looks like half frame is about the same crop factor as a digital SLR. 18x24 vs Nikon's 15.7x23.6 and Canon's 14.8x22.2. So, half the area of a 36x24 full-35mm-frame, but not a 2x crop factor like I'd guessed.
>> Liquefied !!CF1+3tSFCce
>>156970
Because it's water and I wanted it to be part of the shot.

Looks like the current model is the 8800, ac. I'll be sure to check it out.
>> Anonymous
ac, if you don't mind, could you post a non-resized scan right out of that scanner?

Thanks
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>157113
>ac, if you don't mind, could you post a non-resized scan right out of that scanner?
Nope!

I can post a crop from a non-resized scan right out of that scanner, though. It produces ~27 megapixel files from a 35mm frame, and 4chan scoffs at even the 10 megapixel files my DSLR makes.

(Can't do either right now, though. Will try to remember when I get home)
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
Pbase or a file host, perhaps?
>> Anonymous
>>157012
>>157011
>>157010
>>157009
>>157008
thank you, kind sir!
makes me wanna grab my nikon f75 or smena and go out, shoot and buy the scanner on my way back home.
>> Anonymous
>>157118
wow. really.

That's fine then. A crop would be nice, if you don't mind, but I was just trying to get an idea of what sort of resolution you're looking at in the end result. That isn't interpolated or anything, right?

Why would anyone buy ~$1000 strip scanners if they can just pick up one of these for about $170? Aside from the potential to automate it with a batch loader, what are you losing by going with one of these?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>157127
Nope, no interpolation. It's a 9600x4800 scanner, and I scan at 4800dpi, so I'm actually throwing away half of the resolution in one direction so it doesn't interpolate the other.

I don't know how dedicated film scanners are better. I'm pretty cheap, so I don't have one, so I can't do a side-by-side comparison.
>> Liquefied !!CF1+3tSFCce
>>157130
I use dedicated film scanners at school and while they give better resolution and dynamic range, they're a fucking pain in the ass to work with because it's impossible to get the film completely flat in the holder.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>157127
Fullsize
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>157293
100% crop
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Don't know if it's worth a damn, but woot.com has a scanner that can handle slides and negatives (35mm) for $40 today.