I'm thinking about getting a scanner so I can.. scan (obviously) negatives.
I'm on a bit of a tight budget, and I'm wondering what in specific I should look for. Will a regular old scanner do the job?
How about printing?
>>2761376
>Will a regular old scanner do the job?
No, not for negatives. You need one with a light in the lid that will shine through the negative to the scanner sensor.
If you're on a budget, check out a V500 for medium format, or a Plustek 8100 for 35mm.
>>2761386
Brilliant, thank you!
I should have said it is 35mm I'd be scanning in the original post.
>>2761386
Is there any reason to get a V500 over a V550? I notice that the V500 seems to be discontinued and costs more than the V550, which I could go get from Fry's right now if I wanted to.
>>2761480
Sorry I don't know the differences. I have the V500, though I assume that The V550 is newer and better. I'm sure Google knows the differences.
I get by on an epson perfection 2400 but the V500 is what I'd suggest.
>>2761376
eos M, vintage macro lens on ebay adapter, flash on an extension cable.
>>2761376
An Epson Perfection 4990 is also a pretty good scanner, especially for slides.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 5355 Image Height 3957 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format
I'll probably get shat on for saying this, but the Epson V370 isn't bad at all. Only $99, so it's probably the cheapest scanner with a transparency unit that you'll find.
Also works great on Linux, if you're into that.
>>2761645
That actually looks OK, too bad it doesn't seem to have a holder for 120 film.
I, in turn, will probably get shat on for saying this, but I could care less about 35mm, I'll just use my DSLR. I only shoot film to shoot MF/LF.
>>2761376
I have the HP G4050, it does B&W pretty good. (scan as color slides and invert in PS/LR or gimp). But it does color pretty bad. I manages to get decent color scans by buying vuescan.
>>2762224
>I only shoot film to shoot MF/LF.
That's good, since every scanner mentioned in this thread is complete junk for 135
>>2761386
I'm literally trying to decide between those two scanners. Could someone explain the advantages/disadvantages of both?
>>2762671
Or buying the Canon 100 2.8 used and using my 6D but I'm unsure of the best option.
>>2762671
The disadvantage is that neither of them are DSLR scanning.
The advantage is you don't need to understand how to use a camera to operate one.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD. Camera Model GR Camera Software GIMP 2.8.14 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 28 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:10:28 08:08:19 Exposure Time 1/40 sec F-Number f/2.8 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 320 Lens Aperture f/2.8 Brightness 1.6 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 18.30 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2138 Image Height 795 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Sharpness Normal
>>2762678
$350 AUD, which is between $20-$40 more than what I can find the V500 and 8100 for.
I think I should go with the lens and just DSLR scan even though its more fiddly.
>>2762675
The hunnit macro is a great buy.
Here it was the taking and scanning lense.
Cheap as shit secondhand too.
>~$350AUD
>>2762688
Righto, I'll get it
>>2762706
I'm proud of you, anonymous.
