Does anyone have any experience using the CanoScan 2710, particularly for B & W? Also I am wondering if anyone has used the Epson 2450 for scanning B & W 35mm negs or slides. Behind this query I am wondering if the 2450 is adequate for 35mm, because it seems pretty good for medium format, or whether it really is better to get a dedicated 35mm film scanner, and if so whether the 2710 is adequate. (Prices on the 2710 have come down to under $400.)

-- Christopher Goodwin (christopher.goodwin@gte.net), March 21, 2002

Answers

I have the Epson 2450 as well as a Minolta Scan Dual II (similar, a little higher spec than the CanoScan 2710). If your goal is the best 35mm scans you can make in this general price range, stick with the dedicated film scanner. The focusing capability and precision film handling returns higher resolution, better results than can be managed by the 2450 for small formats.

That said, I have scanned as small as Minox 8x11mm negatives with the Epson and been able to produce quite nice small prints, up to 6x8" max in my experience. My Tessina format and halfframe-35 scans with the Epson are similarly quite satisfactory given the resolution limitations and modest size prints.

A quick test of the 2450, with comparison 35mm film scanner image, is available at Epson 2450 First Test.

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), March 21, 2002.

Christopher,

I don't know where you live, but here are some current price comparisons at B&H:

Canon - CanoScan FS-2710 2720dpi = US$300 (or $41 per Million dots)

Canon - CanoScan FS-2720 2720dpi = US$450 (or $61 per Mega dot)

Minolta - DiMage Scan Dual II 2820dpi = US$370 (or $47 per Mega dot)

Canon - CanoScan FS4000US 4000dpi = US$875 (or $55 per Mega dot)

Nikon - Coolscan IV ED (LS-40) 2900dpi = US$850 (or $101 per Mega dot)

Nikon - SuperCoolscan 4000 ED (LS 4000) 4000dpi = US$1,600 (or $100 per Mega dot)

I know this is tangential to your question, but are the Nikon's that good to warrant more than double the cost per dot?

Is Canon a better buy at 4000dpi?

If cost is no object, which of the above will provide sharp prints? For Color? For Black and White?

Thanks,

-- Vikram (VSingh493@aol.com), March 21, 2002.

What a cool way to look at it! :-)

-- Michael Darnton (mdarnton@hotmail.com), March 21, 2002.

The the original question, I agree a dedicated film scanner is better. Regarding the evaluation of price/performance based on dpi, it is very misleaging. It amazes me that the quality of the scanner lens is overlooked in a Leica forum. Other things are flare control, durability, productivity, noise control, multi-sample (an essantial functionnality for me) etc...

-- Stephane Bosman (stephane_bosman@yahoo.co.uk), March 22, 2002.

Christopher, I have used the CanoScan 2710 extensively and currently own the CanoScan 2720 (USB). It is the best scanner I have personally used including the Nikon Coolscan 1000 and 2000, Polaroid 35 and 4000. Unless you are printing out to posters or billboards, 2720 dpi should be more than enough in my opinion, others may disagree. Are you scanning B&W negs or color and then converting to B&W? I can pass on a great little Photoshop tip if you are converting color to B&W.-----------------------------------------------------------

-- Dayton P. Strickland (daytonst@bellsouth.net), March 22, 2002.