[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Home]
4chanarchives logo
i'm looking for a film scanner, <$300. i'm in canada,

You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography

Thread replies: 6
Thread images: 1
File: ls_2000.jpg (20 KB, 350x292) Image search: [Google]
ls_2000.jpg
20 KB, 350x292
i'm looking for a film scanner, <$300. i'm in canada, so would rather not buy off of ebay (shipping is ridiculous). the best thing available on my local classifieds is a nikon ls-2000 for $200.

this scanner is from 1999, and i'm unsure if it's worthwhile to spend $200 on such an old piece of equipment. i'd need to get an scsi-to-usb and run an older version of windows in a virtual desktop.

i need a scanner for mostly black and white 35mm negatives; i want decent quality that could work in an online publication or for making small prints.
>>
>>2720237
Any of the film orientad flat bed scanners (Epson Vxxx, Canoscan xxxx, etc) will give you better results than that (with far less work too).
>>
>>2720237
>online publication or for making small prints.

I am a fan of dedicated film scanners but for what you need, a flat bed will be fine.

if you want better quality don't look any older than the Coolscan 8000/4000
>>
>>2720237
For shits and giggles, the US Amazon is offering that thing for about $906 right now.
>>
PLUSTEK
L
U
S
T
E
K

They're more modern. Not exactly the most amazing things ever, but pretty good. Better than a flatbed for 35mm.
>>
I purchased a Canon FS4000US from eBay for $200 which is the same price of the Canoscan 9000F, does less as far as versatility, but the quality is noticeable superior when pixel-peeping or making large prints.

That's the thing, the superior quality is only noticeable different when pixel-peeping or printing large prints. Dedicated film scanners typically a long time to scan, like a pain in the fucking ass long time, but the quality is great. On my Canoscan FS4000US, ONE frame of 35mm at the highest settings possible (4800dpi w/ Dust Removing IR) takes 15 minutes to scan!
Thread replies: 6
Thread images: 1

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at [email protected] with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.
If a post contains illegal content, please click on its [Report] button and follow the instructions.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need information for a Poster - you need to contact them.
This website shows only archived content and is not affiliated with 4chan in any way.
If you like this website please support us by donating with Bitcoin at 1XVgDnu36zCj97gLdeSwHMdiJaBkqhtMK