Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: First experience with the Canon 9000F scanner A 300 SG$ Film Scanner

  1. #1

    Default First experience with the Canon 9000F scanner A 300 SG$ Film Scanner

    Ok, ignoring many of the negative comments I read on the internet regarding the Canon 9000F, I bought one. It was not really my intention to use it as a high quality film scanner. I wanted to used it for preview of negatives, because with my polaroid filmscanner, it takes about an hour to preview 36 images form a 35mm film.

    However, reading the specs, I got curious and wanted to find out what this thing can do, and how much of the advertising is really true. 9600 dpi for this price...give me a break.


    Anyway, my first impression was ...wow, it is BIG. Also, it scanner the same A4 size as my old Canon flatbed scanner, it is around 15cm longer, 3 cm wider and 3 times as high . All plastic, so, handle with care .

    Installation was trouble free , plug and play on a mac . BUt if you run lion, you probably need to update the canon driver.

    The scanner comes with 3 film holder, a 35mm, that fits 2 stripes of 6 negatives, a slide holder that fits 5 35mm slides and a 120mm holder that fits a maximum size of 6cm X 22cm ( a reason to buy a medium format panorama camera I guess) .

    The scanner did his initial job as I wanted, a quick preview in reasonable quality of 12 B&W Negatives takes probably 1 to 2 minutes, including mounting the film into the holder. Thats what I bought it for and this function works great.

    But, as I had the film loaded anyway, why not try out the full potential, 9600X9600 DPI / up to 48 bit . I only use the 16 bit grey function, as I am scanning B&W film.

    If you want to get into this, first, you need a big pot of coffee. Scanning one 24X36 B&W negative in full resolution takes about 8 minutes.

    You are then rewarded with a 250 mb file , that equals a 120mega pixel digital file (and thats only B&W).

    BUt is this just a large file , or are there really that much details in ?

    I would say , the truth is somewhere in the middle.

    Do not expect wonders form a scanner that cost you 300 SG$ , 40 % of its competitor form Epson, and not even the price of a film holder form a pro scanner.

    But, the result is not bad at all, don't get me wrong. I was impressed. This quality for such a low price.

    Here is a test scan form a Ilfrod Pan-F 35mm , and an extreme enlargement of that same scan.

    The scanner is for sure good enough for this kind of film resolution. And form my point of view , it is good enough as a film scanner for for most amateur photographers , who are looking for solution that doesn't burn a hole in the wallet, and still gives a decent quality.

    Great product, value for money.

    ( Sorry, I know, I have some dirt/ dust on the negatives, I am a bit in a rush today)
    [IMG] testScan-111222-0002 by AchimReh, on Flickr[/IMG]

    [IMG] testScan-111222Enlarge by AchimReh, on Flickr[/IMG]
    Last edited by ed9119; 23rd December 2011 at 01:26 PM.

  2. #2
    Moderator ed9119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    10,943
    Blog Entries
    26

    Default re: First experience with the Canon 9000F scanner A 300 SG$ Film Scanner

    moved to review section
    thank you for a good write up !

    any pics of the scanner itself ? and can it take medium format film ?
    Last edited by ed9119; 23rd December 2011 at 01:27 PM.
    shaddap and just shoot .... up close
    Walkeast

  3. #3

    Default Re: First experience with the Canon 9000F scanner A 300 SG$ Film Scanner

    the scanner can take medium format, as stated above " 120mm holder that fits a maximum size of 6cm X 22cm ( a reason to buy a medium format panorama camera I guess) ." Sorry, I am on the way to the airport now, will post some medium format scans only in january.

  4. #4

    Default Re: First experience with the Canon 9000F scanner A 300 SG$ Film Scanner

    mind if you do another crop of the image at 100%, where the focus of the photo is at, because what you have shown seems to be "out of focus". If possible!! Thanks!!
    One day you'll see.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •