Best scanner under 5 grand

[mikossant]

Many scanners I see mentioned in the forums use scsi interfaces or some other primitive connection. I don't want an epson consumer scanner, but something that can provide me with the highest quality without costing more than $5,000. I plan to scan 8x10 slides.
thank you so much

[Matus Kalisky]

Depends what is your application. You can find here around that if you do not need more than 4x enlargement you can get by with one of the last Epsons or the Microtek M1 which is supposed to have rather good D-range. If you need more and want to scan smaller (smaller than 4x5) formats too, you may consider some older professional flatbed (Screen Cezanne, Creo Eversmart Pro etc.) scanner where you most probably have ot deal with older software/harware, SCSI connections and when neded very expensive repairs. I consider one of these on a longer run too. Have look here for some used/refurbished units:

http://www.brakensiek.com/
http://www.pressresale.com
http://www.genesis-equipment.com/

Good luck, as there is AFAIK no easy and safe way out

[Brian Ellis]

I'm not a scanner expert but my impression from a lot of reading is that $5000 isn't going to gain you enough improvement with 8x10 film to justify the extra $4000+ you're spending vs the Epson 700/750 or the Microtek M1. I used to scan 8x10 b&w film on my Epson 4990 and was very pleased with the results though my prints weren't more than roughly 2x. FWIW I think you'd be better off spending some of the $4000 on a computer that can handle the size files you're going to have when you scan 8x10 color film and using the balance to pay a lab for the scanning. But if some of the people here who are experts tell you differently, listen to them and ignore me.

[Lenny Eiger]

Many scanners I see mentioned in the forums use scsi interfaces or some other primitive connection. I don't want an epson consumer scanner, but something that can provide me with the highest quality without costing more than $5,000. I plan to scan 8x10 slides.
thank you so much

Howtek 4500's usually cost about that much. Will blow you away with the quality off an 8x10. You can make a 40 inch print at 500 dpi, even at half resolution.

Do be careful, however, a refurb drum is around 1200-1500, so make sure the scanner comes with one, and the same goes for a mounting station. They usually come with software of some type, but you can upgrade to Digital Photo Lab for about $1500 (can do this later). Ultimately, it will probably cost you a little more than the 5K, but not too much more and it gives you a lot in return.

Lenny

[mikossant]

Say I decide to purchase a drum scanner, what else will I need. From what I've read the older scanners may require an older computer. Do I need an image setter? I've seen silverfast mentioned many times in the scanning forums. Do I need this?
Thank you for enlightening me.

[Lenny Eiger]

Say I decide to purchase a drum scanner, what else will I need. From what I've read the older scanners may require an older computer. Do I need an image setter? I've seen silverfast mentioned many times in the scanning forums. Do I need this?
Thank you for enlightening me.

Silverfast is one option. I prefer Digital PhotoLab, by Aztek. Very professional piece of software.... It requires a PC to run it (its least likeable feature). I also use StudioPrint as a RIP and it also runs only on the PC, so I run scanning and printing away from my editing machine, which means the mac is free to do whatever I want with Photoshop without having to wait for some printing issue... Silverfast has versions that run on either mac or pc...

One also needs a drum, and a mounting station. Most often these come with a package, since you are buying used. Then you need some clear acetate, drum cleaning fluid, mounting fluid and tape. You can buy them all from Aztek, or there are less expensive versions of things here and there...

Then you need a little time to figure out how to mount... and maybe someone who will give you a few minutes to show you...

I hope that helps.

It gets easier...

Lenny

[Scott Rosenberg]

i picked up a screen cezanne with fresh bulbs and just about every accessory made for it for considerably less than your stated budget... it's a very, VERY good scanner - in an entirely different league than the epsons or microteks or any of the 'prosumer' units out there. it's as good as the tango drum scans i used to have made, and being that it's a flat bed, is much easier to operate. seybold tested a bunch of scanners - drum scanners included - a few years back and the screen cezanne came out on top. after working with it for several months, i can see why.

[Lenny Eiger]

i picked up a screen cezanne with fresh bulbs and just about every accessory made for it for considerably less than your stated budget... it's a very, VERY good scanner - in an entirely different league than the epsons or microteks or any of the 'prosumer' units out there. it's as good as the tango drum scans i used to have made, and being that it's a flat bed, is much easier to operate. seybold tested a bunch of scanners - drum scanners included - a few years back and the screen cezanne came out on top. after working with it for several months, i can see why.

I think its great that you are happy with your scanner. I don't suggest that you need to change at all. It's not a bad scanner. I have seen output from one of these... and suffice it to say the fellow comes to me to have scans made for the prints he's going to sell.

The Cezanne is not the top scanner, not even in the flatbed category. A scan from a Tango by someone who knew what they were doing should exceed the quality of the Cezanne easily. Without question on a transparency. Have Cramer do one for you... if you want to check it out. A Premier will blow it away in sharpness and detail.

Enjoy it in good health. I don't mean that facetiously, either. I hope it gives you many years of good use. I've been reminded that many of the folks on this forum are hobbyists, and at all different places in their respective photographic careers. There are plenty who may not have the resources to purchase a drum scanner, top flatbed, or even buy drum scans. There's nothing wrong with that - at all - I'm not rich either. All I am trying to say is that we ought to keep the record straight on things. And I sincerely don't mean to be unkind.

Lenny

[Scott Rosenberg]

if anyone would like to read the seybold report, shoot me an email or pm and i'll gladly send you a copy.

[Don Hutton]

It's also available in the Yahoo Scan Hi-end files section... The real issue with the Seybold report is that it was aimed the prepress industry for output on press equipment 10 years ago, not photographers looking at different criteria today. Having read it many times, I'm not convinced it's worth the time to read.

[Peter De Smidt]

I would hope that a $35000 drum scanner, the Premier, would be much better than a Cezanne, which can be bought for less than $1000. That's not really an interesting question. A more interesting question would be how a Cezanne compares to a Howtek 4500, or similar. Personally, I have no idea. There are so many variables, that comparisons are tough. What were the settings in the software? How old are the bulbs? ...

[Don Hutton]

I would hope that a $35000 drum scanner, the Premier, would be much better than a Cezanne, which can be bought for less than $1000. That's not really an interesting question. A more interesting question would be how a Cezanne compares to a Howtek 4500, or similar. Personally, I have no idea. There are so many variables, that comparisons are tough. What were the settings in the software? How old are the bulbs? ...Peter

I too would be interested. If any Cezanne owners are interested in testing their scanners against a middle of the road Howtek 4500, I'd be very interested. I've personally yet to see a flatbed scan which really rivals a decent drum scan, but that may well be my relative inexperience... I'd be very happy to exchange some chromes and negs and scans thereof with a Cezanne owner to understand the relative merits and disadvantages of both.

[Lenny Eiger]

I would hope that a $35000 drum scanner, the Premier, would be much better than a Cezanne, which can be bought for less than $1000. That's not really an interesting question. A more interesting question would be how a Cezanne compares to a Howtek 4500, or similar. Personally, I have no idea. There are so many variables, that comparisons are tough. What were the settings in the software? How old are the bulbs? ...

Peter,

This fellow stated he was scanning 8x10's. There is no need for a Premier. The Howtek 4500 is what I suggested, and the Cezanne is not even in the same class. When I had a 4500, it beat out a Tango scan easily. It's one of the better scanners out there, it's sharp, has aperture control, not to mention a PMT, etc. The Cezanne can't compare.

Lenny

[mikossant]

Someone mentioned being able to get a cezanne for $1,000. Where do you guys find these deals. Genesis equipment sells them for 5 grand.

[Peter De Smidt]

It takes some looking. I bought mine after an auction on Ebay didn't meet it's reserve.

I've compared a 4x5 scan done by a fine-art scanner/printer on a Howtek 6500 with DPL software to a scan of the same TMY in PMK 4x5 negative scanned on my Cezanne. Neither I nor anyone I had look at it felt that one scan was better than the other.

[mikossant]

Does anyone know how old the howtek scanmaster 7500 is?
the serial number is p42903H

[uniB]

I've just picked up a Howtek D4000 which comes with Aurora software – any idea how this software compairs to Silverfast? Does the software effect scan quality or is it all just a matter of workflow? I would rather get the most from my scan and then do any post precessing in Photoshop.

[audioexcels]

Peter

I too would be interested. If any Cezanne owners are interested in testing their scanners against a middle of the road Howtek 4500, I'd be very interested. I've personally yet to see a flatbed scan which really rivals a decent drum scan, but that may well be my relative inexperience... I'd be very happy to exchange some chromes and negs and scans thereof with a Cezanne owner to understand the relative merits and disadvantages of both.

Has anyone contacted you about doing this? It would be an excellent idea and very beneficial not only for the person you are exchanging scans with, but for others that are curious to know what one can expect from a drum scanner and the flatbeds. This way we do not have people saying the Howtek is in a different class or even that the flatbed is in a different class, etc. etc.

[sanking]

Let me comment that I have compared scans of the same color negative made with Howtek 4500 and 6500 with an EverSmart Pro. The Howtek 4500 scan was made by Don Hutton, I can not mention who made the one with the 6500.

In the comparison scans my impression is that the EverSmart Pro actually beat the Howtek 6500 overall, but Don's scan with the 4500 beat slightly the EverSmart Pro scan. But anyone who claims that the Howtek is in a different class is speaking from lack of direct comparison, plain and simple. Operator skill appears to be at least as important in this comparison as hardware.

You can see some of the comparison scans in an article I posted on the Hybrid section. http://www.hybridphoto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=743

Since that time Don and I have compared a number of other scans between his Howtek 4500 and my EverSmart Pro. In every case the Howtek scan, at 4000 spi, is slightly better than those made with the EverSmart Pro at 3175 spi. But you would have to make a really huge print, even from a MF negative, to see any difference.

Sandy king






Has anyone contacted you about doing this? It would be an excellent idea and very beneficial not only for the person you are exchanging scans with, but for others that are curious to know what one can expect from a drum scanner and the flatbeds. This way we do not have people saying the Howtek is in a different class or even that the flatbed is in a different class, etc. etc.

[Tyler Boley]

to address the software though, I had not seen this thread before... it would be wise to look into what platforms are supported by Aurora, it is no doubt a long dead application. My 4500 came with Polaris, nearly useless, dongled, certainly not OSX ready, and could not save out a 16 bit grayscale file. Color management crashed it, etc etc., also dead.
I went with Silverfast and have been happy with the scans, despite the unwieldy software, it will give all the controls you need including aperture, and is regularly updated.
Tyler

[audioexcels]

Let me comment that I have compared scans of the same color negative made with Howtek 4500 and 6500 with an EverSmart Pro. The Howtek 4500 scan was made by Don Hutton, I can not mention who made the one with the 6500.

In the comparison scans my impression is that the EverSmart Pro actually beat the Howtek 6500 overall, but Don's scan with the 4500 beat slightly the EverSmart Pro scan. But anyone who claims that the Howtek is in a different class is speaking from lack of direct comparison, plain and simple. Operator skill appears to be at least as important in this comparison as hardware.

You can see some of the comparison scans in an article I posted on the Hybrid section. http://www.hybridphoto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=743

Since that time Don and I have compared a number of other scans between his Howtek 4500 and my EverSmart Pro. In every case the Howtek scan, at 4000 spi, is slightly better than those made with the EverSmart Pro at 3175 spi. But you would have to make a really huge print, even from a MF negative, to see any difference.

Sandy king

Thanks Sandy.

I think the real question is, if one is to buy a flatbed or a drum scanner, what to expect in terms of ease of use and results from the two scanners. In other words, which scanner is the easier one to use or are they both similarly easy/difficult to use? For example, Don has mentioned that learning to use the Howtek is not very difficult, but putting it to use vs. his much smaller Scan-Multi (the 35mm/120 based scanner comparable to the Nikons) was more of a hassle since it requires a seperate room due to size and is simply a beastly machine to operate vs. the much smaller Minolta scanner.

Another question could be which one would require more expense if it needed repair and/or what the longevity of one is vs. the other.

All helpful questions, I feel, for those looking to put money into a high end flatbed or drum scanner and what to expect in terms of handling/working with the unit, how long each typically lasts, and perhaps most importantly, how pricey they are to repair?

[Kirk Gittings]

You can see some of the comparison scans in an article I posted on the Hybrid section. http://www.hybridphoto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=743
Finally, some actual comparisons. Thanks Sandy.

[sanking]

Mike,

I really don't have an answer to all those questions. Both the Howtek and EverSmart (and Cezanne) are very large and heavy scanners. Both cost a lot of money new, and if repairs are needed a lot of money will change hands.

Comparisons are compllicated. From my experience the Howtek 4500 willl give a slightly better scan than the EverSmart Pro, but the EverSmart is easier to use, can scan up to 12X17" and can scan both flexible and rigid negative and refllexive materials. I personallly would not trade my EverSmart Pro even up for a Howtek 4500, but others may come to different conclusions based on their own work.

Sandy King





Thanks Sandy.

I think the real question is, if one is to buy a flatbed or a drum scanner, what to expect in terms of ease of use and results from the two scanners. In other words, which scanner is the easier one to use or are they both similarly easy/difficult to use? For example, Don has mentioned that learning to use the Howtek is not very difficult, but putting it to use vs. his much smaller Scan-Multi (the 35mm/120 based scanner comparable to the Nikons) was more of a hassle since it requires a seperate room due to size and is simply a beastly machine to operate vs. the much smaller Minolta scanner.

Another question could be which one would require more expense if it needed repair and/or what the longevity of one is vs. the other.

All helpful questions, I feel, for those looking to put money into a high end flatbed or drum scanner and what to expect in terms of handling/working with the unit, how long each typically lasts, and perhaps most importantly, how pricey they are to repair?