cheap 35mm film scanner - is it any good?

[anir...@gmail.com]

I just saw it was advertised in our local store. It costs around $100.
It is an Optex Digiscan, dedicated for 35mm negatives and slides. It
comes with a software.
See brochure at http://www.gentec-intl.com/GentecInc/Press/digiscan_release.pdf
My question is how good is it?. Is it worth to get, rather than to
scan the colour prints. They said that it has a 5 MP sensor and can
get a 2592x1680 resolution JPG files.
I know that dedicated 35mm scanner made by Canon, Nikon or Epson is
expensive (price $600 and up). Some has a fancy cleaning tool,
recognizing a tiny spot in a negative IS a major factor when you scan
negatives. So, is a $100 a waste of money, or can it make reasonable
digital photos out of this machine? Anyone use this before or similar
cheap 35mm scanner ( this is a new product by Optex, came out in Dec
2008)?. I heard that there are other negative scanners around this
price at some camera stores, or Costco. Is it worth it, or should I
stick to my old Canon flat bed scanner and use my old photo prints?

Thanks for the info.

[Dave Cohen]

Friend of mine got one that looks like picture and cost $100. No
adjustment on scanning. Did a reasonable job on his negatives, very poor
on a bunch of my old slides. If you have decent prints, stay with the
flatbed as long as scanned quality is good.
Dave Cohen

[tmo...@wildblue.net]

On Feb 2, 8:03 pm, anira...@gmail.com wrote:
> I just saw it was advertised in our local store. It costs around $100.
> It is an Optex Digiscan, dedicated for 35mm negatives and slides. It
> comes with a software.

> See brochure athttp://www.gentec-intl.com/GentecInc/Press/digiscan_release.pdf

> My question is how good is it?. Is it worth to get, rather than to
> scan the colour prints. They said that it has a 5 MP sensor and can
> get a 2592x1680 resolution JPG files.
> I know that dedicated 35mm scanner made by Canon, Nikon or Epson is
> expensive (price $600 and up). Some has a fancy cleaning tool,
> recognizing a tiny spot in a negative IS a major factor when you scan
> negatives. So, is a $100 a waste of money, or can it make reasonable
> digital photos out of this machine?  Anyone use this before or similar
> cheap 35mm scanner ( this is a new product by Optex, came out in Dec
> 2008)?. I heard that there are other negative scanners around this
> price at some camera stores, or Costco. Is it worth it, or should I
> stick to my old Canon flat bed scanner and use my old photo prints?
>
> Thanks for the info.

Not a scanner at all but a small sensor 5mp digital camera. Hardly the
best choice, you'd do better with a second hand macro lens on your
digital camera. Would a cheap scanner do better, maybe maybe not, go
up to a an Epson V500 or Canoscan 8800 and you'll probably do better.

Tom

[Alex Singleton]

On 2009-02-03 01:03:47 +0000, anir...@gmail.com said:

> I heard that there are other negative scanners around this
> price at some camera stores, or Costco. Is it worth it, or should I
> stick to my old Canon flat bed scanner and use my old photo prints?

I'd generally recommend a flatbed like the Epson Perfection V700, which
is more than your suggested budget; but there are cheaper Epson
flatbeds with transparency adaptors that take fewer transparencies
simultaneously and are therefore a bit slower.

Alex

--
Alex Singleton
http://www.alexsingleton.co.uk/