i don't know how i got bitten by the film bug. must be cause i've been looking at this forum. i don't know anything about film cameras so any advice would be helpful for me.
i bought a nikon FE from ebay and some FUJICOLOR PRO 160S 135-36 (don't know the short name form for this) from bhphotovideo cause it can be developed by the C-41 process at my nearby walgreens.
my questions for anyone who is kind enough to answer them for me:
1. what scanner around 300 bucks is good?
2. should i just skip the scanner and send my film to a pro lab where they will just develop and scan for me?
.... now if I can somehow learn online on how to load and unload film to the Nikon FE...
adamjohari wrote:
i don't know how i got bitten by the film bug. must be cause i've been looking at this forum. i don't know anything about film cameras so any advice would be helpful for me.
i bought a nikon FE from ebay and some FUJICOLOR PRO 160S 135-36 (don't know the short name form for this) from bhphotovideo cause it can be developed by the C-41 process at my nearby walgreens.
my questions for anyone who is kind enough to answer them for me:
1. what scanner around 300 bucks is good?
2. should i just skip the scanner and send my film to a pro lab where they will just develop and scan for me?
.... now if I can somehow learn online on how to load and unload film to the Nikon FE... ...Show more →
That film is usually just referred to as 160S or ProS.
1. A used Minolta Scan Dual III or IV is your best bet and can be had for ~$2-300 from eBay. if a Mac user or a Vista/Win7 user you'll also need VueScan.
2. If you end up shooting anything more than a minimal amount of film the scanner will pay for itself fairly quickly. Good Pro Lab scans aren't cheap and cheap minilab scans are typically awful.
I'm wrestling with buying a scanner too at the moment. I've heard the Epson V500 is great for medium format film and decent for 35mm (and it is only $170ish). I've not been happy with the scans from Walgreens.
Side note...I'm going to be trying some 120 B&W...anyone have a recomendation for a place to send it to be processed that doesn't take a year and cost an arm and a leg?
Back OT....one recent one from my little Olympus XA with Ilford XP2:
weezintrumpete wrote:
I'm wrestling with buying a scanner too at the moment. I've heard the Epson V500 is great for medium format film and decent for 35mm (and it is only $170ish). I've not been happy with the scans from Walgreens.
Side note...I'm going to be trying some 120 B&W...anyone have a recomendation for a place to send it to be processed that doesn't take a year and cost an arm and a leg?
Back OT....one recent one from my little Olympus XA with Ilford XP2:
XP2 can be run by any C41 minilab with techs clueful enough to load it. You only need the 120 masks to scan/print, not to develop.
The V500's a nice scanner, especially if you add an aftermarket 120 holder and 35mm and 120 ANR inserts. Betterscanning.com is your friend (yeah, I'm a VERY satisfied customer).
weezintrumpete wrote:
I'm wrestling with buying a scanner too at the moment. I've heard the Epson V500 is great for medium format film and decent for 35mm (and it is only $170ish). I've not been happy with the scans from Walgreens.
Side note...I'm going to be trying some 120 B&W...anyone have a recomendation for a place to send it to be processed that doesn't take a year and cost an arm and a leg?
Back OT....one recent one from my little Olympus XA with Ilford XP2:
Honestly just develop the 120/220 yourself at home.
Twok talk to me man... are you talking c41? E6? I havent researched it much but the stories about 5 baths, special tanks and accurate temperatures scared me off. Is it really a pain?
Spyro P. wrote:
Twok talk to me man... are you talking c41? E6? I havent researched it much but the stories about 5 baths, special tanks and accurate temperatures scared me off. Is it really a pain?
I was just talking about B&W. I've not tried anything else, but black and white 210 is easy enough to just do at home.
C41 at home is not bad, only a 2-3 step process. I've done tons of that in the past and will be setup to do it again soon. This time around I am going to use a Phototherm SSK-4, but in the past I had used a Jobo CPE/CPP ? (I forget the exact details - it wasnt' an ATL though). E6 is more challenging but still not too bad.
For any of these though you really want at least a tempering bath (which can be had pretty cheap, or DIY), or ideally a roller-processor like Jobo ATL 1000/1500, Jobo CPP/CPE/etc., or the Phototherm SK/SSK series.
Wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea, but the shape of the sedges and shooting stars caught my eye enough to get me to stop driving and pull out the LF camera in the rain.
sorry for a double posting, but under post-processing and printing nobody seems to be interested in a reply:
i have been trying to find the best way to scan film, or sildes, with the help of a digital camera (slr) for quite a while now. slow as i am, i cant present a definite statement yet, when it comes to the question: are the results better or equal or worse, compared to using a dedicate scanner?
but i would say, one can get pretty damn good results already with an APS-H camera. with a modern high-end macro lens (like the newest nikons) and a decent body like canon's 5d MkII one should get better results than with a coolscan, and this much faster. this is my guess.
the only thing to lose is the digital ICE. but then again, I do not like ICE at all, anyway.
it would be nice if somebody could comment on this, I cannot find much using the search function.
I'd think that a dedicated scanner, like a Coolscan is going to give you better quality. That being said, if you got a nice macro lens and stuck it on a bellows and used a slide copying adapter, you could probably bang through a lot of negatives pretty quickly. I've seen people who have done that - it's pretty good and is probably sufficient for what you want. However, I think the Coolscan will provide superior results if the time is spent on it.
