Scanning film: Plustek 8300 vs. Sony camera + Valoi easy35?

[TheEyesHaveIt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello all,

I'd like to get into scanning (and eventually developing) my negatives at home. I currently have a Sony AR7IV - but no macro lens yet. The two options I have been contemplating would be:

1) Sigma 70mm Art macro + something like the Valoi easy35 - cost ~$800

2) Plustek 8300 - cost ~$540

I've never scanned film before, so curious which option folks here would recommend? What would be the pros and cons in terms of quality? I plan to use Negative Lab Pro for the conversions regardless of which option. I like both of the options in terms of compactness.

Cheers!

[madNbad]

Start with the Plustek. I started with a 7600i and it was a fine scanner. It was slow and would take the better part of an afternoon to work my way through a roll. Camera scanning is much faster but the Plustek comes with bundled software to get you going right away. Currently, I’m using a Sony A7II to scan my film but it took a while before arriving at that point. 
If you can, buy a used Plustek, learn how to use it and post some photos.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[250swb]

I'm not sure need to go as far as the Art macro but get a macro lens and stand. Put it this way, if you buy a Plustek and you scan maybe hundreds of negatives but start to think it's all very slow, so you switch in the future to your camera. And you see that the quality is far better and it's all so much faster, so do you kick yourself and think what a waste of time that was buying a Plustek? At any time when you start along the scanning trail use the best equipment that is practical because you don't want to start scanning your negatives all over again when something better comes along. And cameras now can resolve all the detail in a negative and they aren't making great leaps that mean you'd have to re-tread your steps in the future. 

Scanning even with a camera has a learning curve and you may need to adjust peripheral bits and bobs to get the best setup, but it's not nearly the learning curve needed to get the most out of any scanner. The Plustek is a fine scanner, and if you didn't have an expensive DSLR or mirrorless camera I'd recommend if cost was an issue, but you already have a full frame 61mp camera! Of course the added bonus is you also get yourself a macro lens.

[Ouroboros]

I went from being a dslr scanning sceptic to a convert overnight when I bought a Nikon ES-2 copying attachment for dslr scanning 35mm negatives with my old Nikon D810 and 60mm micro-nikkor f2.8G lens that I already had sitting unused in a cupboard.  My son had put together his own Sony-based 35mm scanning set-up with an Essential film holder and was getting perfectly good enough results to persuade me to try it for myself ( he has a Leica M-A and a iiif).

Prior to buying the ES-2, I scanned 35mm on my Imacon 646 or Plustek 8300i.  The Imacon is painfully slow especially when scanning as a 3F and the Plustek is just slow with a choice of 2 equally painful UI’s.

Scanning 35mm frames with the D810 and ES-2 is lightning fast by comparison, all it takes is a few minutes  to load 6 strips of 6 frames into holders and copy them with the camera.  
 

I then have the benefit of more convenient RAW files  for post processing.

With my medium and large format films I only work on one frame at a time and my Imacon resolution is perfect for those formats,  speed is not a consideration.  
 

Otherwise I see no downside to scanning my 35mm films with the D810/ES-2 and will probably sell the Plustek.

 

Edited September 15 by Ouroboros

[frame-it]

7 hours ago, TheEyesHaveIt said:

Hello all,

I'd like to get into scanning (and eventually developing) my negatives at home. I currently have a Sony AR7IV - but no macro lens yet. The two options I have been contemplating would be:

1) Sigma 70mm Art macro + something like the Valoi easy35 - cost ~$800

2) Plustek 8300 - cost ~$540

I've never scanned film before, so curious which option folks here would recommend? What would be the pros and cons in terms of quality? I plan to use Negative Lab Pro for the conversions regardless of which option. I like both of the options in terms of compactness.

Cheers!

 

 

 

 

 

[hansvons]

1 hour ago, 250swb said:

I'm not sure need to go as far as the Art macro but get a macro lens and stand.

I did some research and tons of testing over 50+ rolls of 35mm negs and will say this: It's precisely what you want for the money. Super sharp in 1:1 from corner to corner at f 11. Anything better hardly exists. Only more expensive. 

[jakontil]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The easy35 valoi is a foolproof film holder from what i watched the video, ideally i would want one, but my EFH and newly custom built copystand have been great

if u havnt already invested in a dedicated scanner, i’d suggest the valoi

i have my epson for medium format and plustek too

[Warton]

14 hours ago, TheEyesHaveIt said:

Hello all,

I'd like to get into scanning (and eventually developing) my negatives at home. I currently have a Sony AR7IV - but no macro lens yet. The two options I have been contemplating would be:

1) Sigma 70mm Art macro + something like the Valoi easy35 - cost ~$800

2) Plustek 8300 - cost ~$540

I've never scanned film before, so curious which option folks here would recommend? What would be the pros and cons in terms of quality? I plan to use Negative Lab Pro for the conversions regardless of which option. I like both of the options in terms of compactness.

Cheers!

I recently went through the similar thought process and decided to go with Macro lens. I was looking at Plustek too but ultimately decided to get a used Nikon Macro 60mm lens for less than $300, and ES2 scanner kit (about $100) to pair with my D810.

The deciding factors for me are:

1. I only shoot B&W film, so I don't need a built-in software with Plustek to invert the negative. I just use my existing Capture One to invert, then adjust the exposure/highlights/shadows, etc.

2. Scanning with DSLR and Macro lens is much quicker.

3. It's cheaper since I have the camera already

As for quality, the critical part of scanning using camera+lens is actually lighting source. I recently asked questions about why my scanned pictures are so grainy and it turns out the culprit is lighting. After purchasing a CineStill led pad (about $40) with SRI95%, everything looks so smooth now.

You Sony AR74 is a good enough full-frame mirrorless, I would suggest using that.

[jgeenen]

I started with a Minolta 5400 scanner for 35mm film and slides. Terribly slow and lots of issues with dust. Then I used an Epson P600 with negativ masks. Not much better.

A macro lens attached to the camera was the best option so far.

I started with a Novoflex bellows set with film duplicator. Very compact package but difficult to get all necessary parts on the used market (you need the bellows, a film holder, a bellows shade, a bellows macro lens 60mm (or 105? - I forgot), and some extension adaptor. Fiddly but well thought German Engineering.

I am now planning to use my M11 for film scanning. Just bought a used macro lens with 1:1 option (I found a good Minolta Macro Rokkorr 3.5/55mm MD for a very reasonable price - other brands are equally good, but way more expensive (Leica Elmarit-R, Micro-Nikkor etc) or often heavily used) and a MD to M conversion adaptor (I start with a cheap Chinese one, if it works as intended I might switch to a better Novoflex adaptor). Combined with a LED light source, a negativ frame (you can use old enlarger plates) and some sort of rectangular stand (that's the most difficult step to get everything aligned properly) and you are done.

A very cheap but interesting alternative I never tested is to get one of the old slide and film duplicators produced by Soligor and some other companies in the 80s. You get them for little money. Haven't tried it yet, so don't know about quality - but setup would be easy. 

Johannes

[Crem]

16 hours ago, TheEyesHaveIt said:

Hello all,

I'd like to get into scanning (and eventually developing) my negatives at home. I currently have a Sony AR7IV - but no macro lens yet. The two options I have been contemplating would be:

1) Sigma 70mm Art macro + something like the Valoi easy35 - cost ~$800

2) Plustek 8300 - cost ~$540

I've never scanned film before, so curious which option folks here would recommend? What would be the pros and cons in terms of quality? I plan to use Negative Lab Pro for the conversions regardless of which option. I like both of the options in terms of compactness.

Cheers!

You have a fantastic camera for scanning 35mm and I wouldn't spend money on a Plustek. I use a Sony A7C plus the following gear: Sigma 70 macro, Negative Supply 4x5 99 CRI light, and a Negative Supply basic stand. I've used both the "Negative Supply Basic Film Carrier" and the "Essential Film Holder". Personally I think the Essential Film Holder is better (holds negatives very flat), but both solutions work well enough. I have no experience with the Valoi easy35. All of my scanning is with 6 frame strips and I can scan entire rolls quickly. I do all editing with Negative Lab Pro. One of my main goals when picking gear was to optimize for speed and that's why I decided against the Plustek. If I were starting over today I'd definitely look at the Valoi as I love the design and it seems like it could scan entire rolls very quickly.

Edited September 15 by Crem

[Warton]

45 minutes ago, Crem said:

You have a fantastic camera for scanning 35mm and I wouldn't spend money on a Plustek. I use a Sony A7C plus the following gear: Sigma 70 macro, Negative Supply 4x5 99 CRI light, and a Negative Supply basic stand. I've used both the "Negative Supply Basic Film Carrier" and the "Essential Film Holder". Personally I think the Essential Film Holder is better (holds negatives very flat), but both solutions work well enough. I have no experience with the Valoi easy35. All of my scanning is with 6 frame strips and I can scan entire rolls quickly. I do all editing with Negative Lab Pro. One of my main goals when picking gear was to optimize for speed and that's why I decided against the Plustek. If I were starting over today I'd definitely look at the Valoi as I love the design and it seems like it could scan entire rolls very quickly.

I personally found those negative holders provided to attach to the light source, for example Cinestill has one, are very flimsy. I used the kit from CineStill for a couple of rolls and don't like it. So I got ES-2 from Nikon. It's snuggly attached to the lens. But of course the downside is that it's lens specific, only working for Nikon Micro lenses.

But I heard good things about Valoi easy35. They look well built and universally fit to many different lenses?

Edited September 15 by Warton

[madNbad]

If you have a A7RIV and want to move to using it for scanning, the Sony FE90 2.8 Macro is a much better choice than the Sigma. I tried both, kept the FE90, sold the Sigma. The Sony nails the focus whereas the Sigma will hunt for a bit. The Sony also has better stabilization. Movement and shake can ruin a good scan. Light source and keeping the negatives flat are the two most important factors in achieving good scans.

It’s a learning process but there is a lot of information available.

[Warton]

1 hour ago, madNbad said:

If you have a A7RIV and want to move to using it for scanning, the Sony FE90 2.8 Macro is a much better choice than the Sigma. I tried both, kept the FE90, sold the Sigma. The Sony nails the focus whereas the Sigma will hunt for a bit. The Sony also has better stabilization. Movement and shake can ruin a good scan. Light source and keeping the negatives flat are the two most important factors in achieving good scans.

It’s a learning process but there is a lot of information available.

I put the camera on a tripod, set the aperture to f/8 or f/11, manually focused, shutter speed about 1/10 to 1/3 second depending on how close the lighting is easy, then I fire the shutter in with delay of 5 seconds. Doing that completely removed the movement and focusing issue.

DSLR like D810 even has curtain upper feature to remove the possibility of slightest shaking of the shutter curtain. But I found it's unnecessary and not applicable to mirrorless like Sony A7 series

Edited September 15 by Warton

[Crem]

19 hours ago, madNbad said:

If you have a A7RIV and want to move to using it for scanning, the Sony FE90 2.8 Macro is a much better choice than the Sigma. I tried both, kept the FE90, sold the Sigma. The Sony nails the focus whereas the Sigma will hunt for a bit. The Sony also has better stabilization. Movement and shake can ruin a good scan. Light source and keeping the negatives flat are the two most important factors in achieving good scans.

It’s a learning process but there is a lot of information available.

I film scan with a Sony a7c and sigma 70 on a copy stand. Shutter speeds for me are 1/3 - 1/8 normally. I manually focus, turn all stabilization off, use electronic shutter, and a 2 second timer. I never have any movement or camera shake. Where is your shake coming from? Are you hand holding while scanning?

Agreed that it’s a learning process. Also there are so many options for how to do it that I think it convinces a lot of people to go with a scanner instead.   

 

 

Edited September 16 by Crem

[madNbad]

1 hour ago, Crem said:

I film scan with a Sony a7c and sigma 70 on a copy stand. Shutter speeds for me are 1/3 - 1/8 normally. I manually focus, turn all stabilization off, use electronic shutter, and a 2 second timer. I never have any movement or camera shake. Where is your shake coming from? Are you hand holding while scanning?

Agreed that it’s a learning process. Also there are so many options for how to do it that I think it convinces a lot of people to go with a scanner instead.   

 

 

The vibrations come from a combination of the copy stand and the desk. Our house is small and it limits both the size and type of desk I can use. Currently, I have a a laminated top that sits on four legs, which I have adjusted and shimmed to be as stable as possible but it doesn’t have the weight to be truly stable.

Secondly is the copy stand. I’m using a Negative Supply Pro Riser MK2 which has been modified with the addition of a Really Right Stuff 60mm Arca-Swiss clamp, longer legs and a thick wooden cutting board as a base. The riser is fine but when Negative Supply introduced the MK3, it is built to a stronger, more stable standard. I’m not quite ready to spend $700 for one. 
After advancing to the next frame, I watch the monitor to make sure the image is still and use a remote release with a three second delay. 
I only run into vibration problems if I accidentally bump the desk. A bigger house and a heavier desk would eliminate the problem.

[TheEyesHaveIt]

Thanks for the feedback, all. I decided to go the camera scanning route given I have the Sony A7RIV and actually, I want to explore macro photography more in general. I think I'll be grabbing a Sony 90mm 2.8 instead of the Sigma for that reason (and selling my 85mm instead).

Have also pre-ordered the easy35 - hopefully it doesn't take too long to ship. Seems like the most "fool"-proof approach and the easiest to setup and breakdown.

[pop]

A lens with internal focusing might be called for. Otherwise, the lens will attempt to drag the valoi to and fro while focusing. As the device with all the tubes is a bit on the heavy side, I fear it might damage the gear in the lens, especially if it's on autofocus.

I use a Meike 60mm f:2.8 macro lens for this purpose and am quite happy.

[TheEyesHaveIt]

Just now, pop said:

A lens with internal focusing might be called for. Otherwise, the lens will attempt to drag the valoi to and fro while focusing. As the device with all the tubes is a bit on the heavy side, I fear it might damage the gear in the lens, especially if it's on autofocus.

I use a Meike 60mm f:2.8 macro lens for this purpose and am quite happy.

I believe the Sony 90mm 2.8 has internal focusing, so doesn't extend the lens at all.

[blackdot]

It seems like everyone who is advocating DSLR scanning emphasizes the speed. But what about the actual quality? Any side-by-side comparisons to the Plustek?

Edited September 19 by blackdot

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Crem]

3 hours ago, blackdot said:

It seems like everyone who is advocating DSLR scanning emphasizes the speed. But what about the actual quality? Any side-by-side comparisons to the Plustek?

I don't have any side by sides, but something to be aware of is that camera scanning has a higher learning curve and a lot of variability in how people actually do it. So if you look at a side by side comparison you are going to have to dig into the details. Some things I would check in any comparison...

1. Lens: Are they using a true macro with flat field of focus? People try all sorts of crazy setups including zoom lenses with extension tubes, vintage lenses, iPhones, etc. 

2. Light source: Are they using a 95+ CRI light? I've read about everything from iPhone screens with a white background image and 99 CRI panels. Light source quality is one of the most important variables to control for with color film.

3. Software: Are they inverting the negative themselves in Lightroom or using software like Negative Lab Pro? Software makes a huge difference since negatives are interpretive.

4. Operator skill: It really took me a while to get a good setup and workflow with camera scanning. I've learned a ton after scanning ~160 rolls and I need to go back and redo some of my early scans.

The Negative Lab Pro Users group on Facebook (12k members) would be a great place to look (or ask) for side by side comparisons.