I shoot a lot of film myself, and for me, scanning is almost as important as the camera, lens, and film stock I use. A poor scan can flatten colors, lose shadow detail and make a perfectly good negative look far worse than it really is, while a good scan can pull out an impressive amount of information from even fairly ordinary 35mm film.
There are also several very different ways to digitize film now, and I don't think there is one solution that makes sense for everyone.
A traditional dedicated scanner such as the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE remains one of the easiest ways to get consistently excellent results from 35mm negatives and slides. It does most of the complicated work for you and, crucially, can use infrared scanning to identify and remove dust and scratches automatically.
The trade-off is speed: high-quality scans can take several minutes per frame. Camera scanning photographs the negative with a digital camera and macro lens, which can produce superb results dramatically faster.
Then there are standalone digital scanners such as the HP FilmScan 7". These prioritize convenience rather than extracting every last piece of information from the negative – you don't even need a computer.
For this guide, I'm considering scan quality alongside the things that start to matter very quickly once you are staring at a roll of 36 negatives: how easy the scanner is to set up, how quickly I can move between frames, how well it keeps film flat, whether dust removal works, how good the supplied software is, and whether the entire workflow represents good value.
I'm Gareth Bevan, Reviews Editor at Digital Camera World, and I shoot and scan a lot of film. I've used dedicated scanners, flatbeds and camera-scanning setups, and I've spent far too many hours trying to coax better color, detail and dynamic range from negatives.
The best film scanners
Why you can trust Digital Camera World Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out how we test.
Best dedicated 35mm film scanner
The Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE remains the dedicated film scanner I would recommend to most photographers who want excellent 35mm scans without building a camera-scanning setup. I've used one extensively, and although I now often prefer camera scanning for speed, purpose-built scanners still have some major advantages.
The 8200i SE is surprisingly small and light, and Plustek includes a soft case that holds the scanner, cables, and film carriers together. That makes it far easier to live with than a large flatbed scanner permanently occupying half a desk. The plastic body doesn't feel particularly luxurious, and some of the buttons feel a little cheap, but mine has survived plenty of use without giving me any reason to worry about durability. The film holders themselves feel slightly flimsy too, although they do the important job extremely well: they keep negatives consistently flat.
The actual scanning process is very manual. A strip can hold up to six frames, but I still have to slide the carrier through one image at a time. At maximum quality, the process is slow, especially once I enable multi-exposure and the infrared pass. A 7200dpi scan can take around two minutes before those additional processes are even taken into account.
The results, though, are excellent. Plustek quotes a maximum 7200dpi resolution and 48-bit color, but I generally think 3600dpi is the more sensible setting for 35mm. It produces much more manageable files while retaining almost all the useful information in the negative. Color is rich, tonal transitions are smooth, and there is enough dynamic range to recover plenty from shadows and highlights.
The 8200i SE's real party trick is its infrared channel. Dust is unavoidable when scanning film, and infrared scanning can identify dust and scratches and remove much of them automatically. That has saved me an enormous amount of retouching time compared with camera scanning.
My biggest complaint isn't really about the hardware at all. The supplied SilverFast software is powerful but dated, cluttered, and more frustrating than I think it needs to be. I personally prefer VueScan.
The 8200i SE is therefore not the scanner I would buy for speed, bulk archives, or medium format. But if I had a smaller collection of 35mm negatives and wanted to extract as much quality as possible with minimal specialist equipment, I would still consider it the best buy here.
Read my full Plustek Opticfilm 8200i SE review
Best compact camera-scanning setup
The original Valoi easy35 was the product that persuaded me camera scanning could actually be easier than using a traditional film scanner. Rather than using a copy stand, the easy35 screws directly onto the filter thread of a macro lens using extension tubes and adapters. The film holder sits at the correct distance in front of the lens, while a built-in high-CRI light source illuminates the negative from behind. Because the entire path between the film and lens is enclosed, stray room light can't bounce around and reduce contrast. Once I have the extension length and focus dialed in, the whole setup effectively becomes one self-contained scanner.
The v2 doesn't reinvent that formula, but it fixes most of my complaints about the original. The body now uses smoother plastic that doesn't attract fluff, the film holder grips negatives more tightly, the light source has been redesigned to be more color accurate, and the controls have been simplified. USB-C charging and roughly four hours of battery life also make it much easier to use pretty much anywhere.
Speed is where this completely changes my scanning workflow. Once everything is set up, I can photograph an entire 36-exposure roll in roughly two to five minutes. I simply feed the film through, line up each frame, and press the shutter. The light is bright and extremely even, the film stays flat, and in my testing I saw no distracting light leaks or meaningful changes in brightness or color from one frame to the next. Even with an inexpensive macro lens, I have achieved results comparable to my dedicated Plustek scanner.
There are important catches. This is only affordable if you already own the expensive bits. You need a decent digital camera, ideally a true 1:1 macro lens, and software such as Negative Lab Pro or another solution to invert and process the negative afterward. If you have none of those things, buying the entire system makes far less financial sense. It is also only a 35mm solution. If you regularly shoot 120 film, I would move up to the Valoi 360 Professional below.
But for photographers like me who already own the necessary camera gear and regularly shoot 35mm, I think the easy35 v2 offers one of the best combinations of quality, speed and simplicity available.
Read my full Valoi easy35 v2 film scanner review
Best budget dedicated 35mm scanner
The OpticFilm 8100 is the scanner I would look at if I wanted the core image quality of the 8200i SE but needed to spend less. The 8100 uses the same basic dedicated-scanner concept. It takes strips of 35mm negatives and mounted slides, reaches a maximum quoted optical resolution of 7200dpi and comes bundled with SilverFast software.
Scan quality is the reason it is still worth considering. At 3600dpi, the 8100 extracts an impressive amount of detail from 35mm negatives and transparencies, while avoiding the absolutely enormous files created at the full 7200dpi setting. For web use, archiving and normal-sized prints, I think 3600dpi is the setting most photographers should use anyway.
There is no escaping the fact that it is slow. The film carrier also needs to be advanced manually, so working through a complete roll is a hands-on process rather than something I can start and leave running.
The major difference from the 8200i SE is infrared scanning, or rather the lack of it. The 8100 cannot automatically identify dust and scratches and map them out of the finished scan. If I only scan freshly developed negatives that I keep meticulously clean, that might not bother me too much. If I'm digitizing an older archive covered in years of small marks, I would happily pay extra for the 8200i SE because I know just how much retouching time its infrared system can save.
But if you primarily care about extracting high-quality files from 35mm film and don't mind doing a little more cleanup afterward, the 8100 gives away surprisingly little in basic image quality.
Best automated 35mm scanner
The OpticFilm 135i is simultaneously one of the best and most frustrating scanners I've used. From a hardware perspective, it solves my biggest complaint about Plustek's 8000-series scanners. Instead of making me manually move the negative carrier from frame to frame, the 135i can automatically advance and scan up to six 35mm frames or six mounted slides in one batch.
The problem is Plustek's supplied QuickScan Plus software. When I reviewed the 135i, I found the files produced through QuickScan Plus noticeably inferior to what I knew this scanner's hardware should be capable of. Color wasn't as accurate as I wanted, digital noise was more prominent, and the processing simply didn't do the photos justice.
But switching to VueScan transformed the 135i. The sharpness, color, and overall quality I expect from Plustek immediately returned. The scanning hardware is excellent. Resolution reaches 7200dpi and, like the 8200i SE, there is a dedicated infrared channel for detecting and automatically correcting dust and scratches. The supplied film holders are very good, keeping negatives reliably flat, and the motorized feeding mechanism makes positioning consistent from one frame to another.
The scanner itself is larger than the 8200i SE but still compact enough for a normal desk. I think it is quite a smart-looking machine too, although it isn't quiet. The motor and scanning mechanism make enough repetitive noise that it can become irritating when scanning large batches.
If you only scan a handful of frames occasionally, I would save the money and buy the 8200i SE. If you regularly scan full rolls and don't want to babysit every single frame, however, the automation becomes genuinely worthwhile.
With the supplied software, the 135i is compromised. With good third-party software, I think it could rival the best dedicated 35mm hardware in this guide.
Read my full Plustek OpticFilm 135i review
Best standalone film scanner
The HP FilmScan 7" is the product I would point anyone toward if they simply wanted to digitize a collection of old negatives without learning scanning software – or even connecting the scanner to a computer.
Film is illuminated inside the body and captured by a 13MP sensor, with the option to output an interpolated 22MP file. That distinction matters because it won't extract the same level of fine detail as something like the Plustek 8200i SE, but it also means each frame can be captured in around two seconds. For a box containing hundreds of old family pictures, I think that trade-off makes a lot of sense.
Ease of use is the big attraction. The 7-inch touchscreen tilts so I can position it at a comfortable viewing angle, while a physical button takes the actual scan. Images are stored directly to an SD card, and USB-C handles power. There is even an HDMI output, so scanned photographs can be displayed directly on a television.
Film compatibility is broad too. The supplied holders and adapters support 135, 126 and 110 film as well as standard 50mm mounted slides. That makes it a much more useful device for archives where you may have several different formats.
Our reviewer found color, brightness, contrast and dynamic range pleasing, and I think the results are comfortably good enough for preserving memories, viewing on screens and sharing with family. Fine detail is softer than a proper dedicated film scanner, however, and I wouldn't choose this if my aim was to make large prints.
There are a couple of oddly basic limitations. Portrait-orientation photographs can't simply be rotated on the device. It isn't especially cheap either. If I were buying specifically to scan current 35mm photography at maximum quality, it's not much more for a higher-quality Plustek. But that isn't really what this HP is for.
This scanner is quick, visual, and almost impossible to get wrong. The ability to feed a frame through, press one button, and immediately see it on a large screen makes the HP far less intimidating than the more technically capable options in this guide.
Read our full HP FilmScan 7in Touch Screen Film Scanner review
Best cheap camera-scanning adapter
The JJC Film Digitizing Adapter is the cheapest route here into the same basic style of camera scanning used by the Valoi easy35, and I was actually more impressed by it than I expected to be.
The concept is straightforward. The adapter attaches to a macro lens using extension tubes, a film holder positions the negative in front of the camera, and a small LED light illuminates it from behind. For the price, the kit is surprisingly comprehensive. It works with full-frame, APS-C and Micro Four Thirds cameras, and the supplied holder does a good job of keeping 35mm film flat. Loading the holder is a little fiddly, but once the film is in place, I got good sharpness across the frame.
Where the JJC falls behind the easy35 is build quality and control of stray light. The plastics feel inexpensive, which is hardly shocking at this price, but the more significant problem is the open-backed design around the scanning area. Unlike the enclosed Valoi, external light can get in and bounce around the negative, reducing contrast and creating uneven illumination around the edges of some scans.
The actual light source is reasonably powerful and consistent in color, so the JJC is capable of producing perfectly usable images. I think the results are easily good enough for social media and preserving old negatives digitally. I just wouldn't use it for an important archive where I wanted absolute consistency across the frame.
Workflow is relatively quick, although film has to be cut into strips of up to six frames rather than being fed continuously from an uncut roll. Mounted slides can also be scanned two at a time.
The other caveat is exactly the same one I have with every inexpensive camera-scanning accessory: the adapter itself might be cheap, but the complete workflow isn't. You still need a digital camera, a capable macro lens, and software to convert your photographed negatives into positive images. If you need to buy all of those as well, a Plustek scanner quickly starts looking like better value.
But if that camera and lens are already sitting in your bag, the JJC makes a lot more sense. It sacrifices some build quality, consistency and light control compared with the easy35, but costs dramatically less.
Read my full JJC Film Digitizing Adapter Set review
Best for 35mm and medium-format camera scanning
If the easy35 is the camera-scanning system I would recommend to a 35mm shooter who wants something compact and straightforward, the Valoi 360 Professional is the setup I would choose for someone who wants a more permanent, versatile scanning station.
The fundamental difference is that the 360 doesn't attach to the front of a lens. Instead, the film sits horizontally beneath a camera mounted on a copy stand. That requires more equipment and more space, but it also makes the system much more flexible. The Professional kit supports both 35mm and 120 film, including medium-format frames up to 6x9, with supplied masks for 6x4.5, 6x6 and 6x7. If I regularly shot both 35mm and medium format, that alone would push me toward the 360 rather than the easy35.
Our review found the build quality excellent. The heart of the system is the 360 Advancer, which uses rubberized rollers to move film smoothly through the holder without slipping. The holders slot securely into place, adjustable feet allow the whole setup to be leveled and a supplied mirror makes aligning the camera perpendicular to the film considerably easier. Once everything is set correctly, changing film holders shouldn't require re-leveling the entire system.
I particularly like the inclusion of Valoi's Duster. The film passes between two brushes before reaching the holder, removing a surprising amount of loose debris before it becomes part of the scan. It won't completely eliminate dust, because nothing really does, but anything that reduces how much cloning I need to do later is worthwhile.
The Cinestill CS-Lite supplied with the kit is another strong component. The panel is evenly diffused with no obvious variation in brightness, and it offers cool, neutral and warm settings. For most negative-conversion workflows I would use the neutral white setting and make the color decisions afterward in software.
Once configured, the system can be extremely fast. Our reviewer was able to work through a full roll in a couple of minutes, simply turning the Advancer, checking the framing and triggering the camera. Tests with 35mm, 6x6 and 6x4.5 film produced consistent results without the system needing constant realignment.
The main disadvantage is what isn't included. You'll still need the camera, a suitable macro lens, a sturdy copy stand and negative-conversion software. But I think that cost makes considerably more sense for photographers who regularly shoot 120 film, because dedicated medium-format scanners can be extremely expensive and good flatbeds are increasingly difficult to buy new.
Read our full Valoi 360 Professional Scanning Kit review
Best for digitizing mixed formats
The Kodak Scanza isn't the scanner I would choose to squeeze every last piece of detail out of my best 35mm negatives. What it is very good at, though, is tackling the sort of mixed box of old film many people actually have sitting in a cupboard: 35mm negatives, mounted slides, 126 and 110 film, and even individual frames from 8mm and Super 8 movie film.
The Scanza is completely self-contained. An LED illuminates the film and a 14MP CMOS sensor photographs the entire frame at once, saving the result as a JPEG directly to an SD card. I don't need a computer or scanning software at all. There is also a 22MP option, although this is created through interpolation rather than capturing additional detail, and in our testing I couldn't see a meaningful quality advantage from using it.
Kodak supplies a useful collection of holders. Once the appropriate holder is installed, I can feed strips through without repeatedly dismantling the scanner. Film positioning can be a little fiddly, particularly when trying to line each frame up perfectly, but our review found the process became considerably easier once I had used it for a while.
The 3.5-inch screen is small compared with the HP's 7-inch display, and our review didn't find the button-driven interface particularly intuitive. However, you can preview negatives as positive images before scanning and make basic adjustments to brightness and RGB color. Interestingly, our reviewer found the Scanza's automatic exposure more dependable than the slightly more expensive Slide N Scan. HDMI output also lets you view scans directly on a TV or monitor.
Speed is excellent. A frame takes under two seconds to capture, so the limiting factor is really how quickly I can feed and align the film. That makes the Scanza far better suited to working through a large family archive than a high-resolution dedicated scanner that might spend several minutes on every photograph.
Image quality is the compromise. Color and automatic exposure are generally pretty good, but fine detail isn't especially sharp, scans can look slightly blocky and the 22MP mode doesn't fix that. There is also no infrared dust and scratch removal, so old film benefits from a careful clean beforehand.
Read our full Kodak Scanza Digital Film Scanner review
How to choose the best film scanner
The first question I would ask is what film you actually need to scan. If your collection is entirely 35mm negatives and mounted slides, a dedicated scanner such as the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE is probably the simplest route to consistently high-quality files. It is compact, purpose-built, and includes infrared dust removal.
If you already own a good digital camera and macro lens, however, camera scanning can be dramatically faster. For 35mm alone, I prefer the Valoi easy35 v2 because it eliminates most of the alignment problems normally associated with camera scanning. If you also shoot medium format, the Valoi 360 Professional is far more flexible and supports both 35mm and 120 film up to 6x9.
How much film you need to scan matters almost as much as format. If I only had a few favorite negatives, I would prioritize outright quality and wouldn't worry too much about waiting several minutes for each scan. If I had hundreds of rolls, that time would become unbearable very quickly. The automated Plustek 135i or a camera-scanning setup can make a huge difference to a large archive.
Think about the finished files too. A quoted resolution of 7200dpi sounds impressive, but I don't normally think 35mm film benefits much from going that high. Around 3600dpi provides an excellent compromise between extracting useful information and producing manageable files. Bigger scans don't magically create detail that wasn't captured by the film in the first place.
Finally, consider the entire cost of the workflow rather than the scanner alone. Camera scanning looks inexpensive when you're pricing a film holder, but add a digital camera, 1:1 macro lens, copy stand, and software, and the cost can become substantial. If you already own those things, it is excellent value. If you don't, a dedicated scanner may actually be cheaper.
What is the best software to scan film?
Scanning software can make all the difference. I have seen exactly the same hardware produce dramatically different results simply by switching applications.
SilverFast is one of the best-known options and is bundled with several Plustek scanners. It is extremely powerful and supports features such as infrared cleaning and multi-exposure scanning, but I find the interface dated and unnecessarily complicated.
I personally prefer VueScan for traditional scanners. It supports a huge range of hardware, gives me detailed control over the scanning process and, in my experience, can dramatically improve the results from devices such as the OpticFilm 135i compared with their basic manufacturer software.
Camera scanning requires a different workflow. The camera simply records a photograph of the negative, so that image still needs to be inverted and color-corrected afterward. Negative Lab Pro is my favorite tool for doing this inside Lightroom Classic, but there are plenty of alternatives, including free options, with varying results.
What is camera scanning?
Camera scanning is really just photographing a negative. You need a digital camera, ideally with plenty of resolution, a proper macro lens capable of focusing closely enough to fill the sensor with the film frame, a way of keeping the negative completely flat, and a bright, evenly diffused light source behind it.
Traditionally, this meant mounting the camera on a copy stand above a lightbox, carefully aligning it so the sensor was perfectly parallel with the negative and finding a separate holder to keep the film flat. Done well, this can deliver excellent quality and is substantially faster than many dedicated scanners. Done badly, small alignment errors can leave one side of the frame soft, while poor-quality lighting can cause uneven brightness or inaccurate color.
Products such as the Valoi easy35 make the process much more approachable by attaching the film holder directly to the lens, essentially locking the camera, negative, and light into alignment. The Valoi 360 goes the other way, retaining a copy-stand setup but giving me a much more sophisticated holder, film advance mechanism, and lighting system.
How we test film scanners
The only way I think you can meaningfully assess a film scanner is to scan a lot of film with it. For my own testing, I work through multiple rolls covering different film stocks, sensitivities, and types, including color negative and black-and-white film. I also use a mixture of newly developed film and older negatives, because a scanner that copes beautifully with pristine new film may behave very differently when faced with dust, scratches, or fading.
I look first at the quality of the finished files: sharpness, fine detail, color, contrast, dynamic range, and whether the scanner is clipping useful information in shadows or highlights.
☑️ Over two thousand products tested and reviewed
📷 8 years of experience testing camera gear and accessories
👥 Team of knowledgeable and passionate reviewers who love photography
✖️ Reviews and guides are unbiased – and never influenced by brands
Dust handling is particularly important. Infrared cleaning on scanners such as the Plustek 8200i SE can remove a huge amount of manual retouching, while camera-scanning systems rely much more heavily on keeping the film physically clean before capture.
I also time my workflow, look at how easily film can be loaded and advanced, check whether holders keep the negative properly flat, and assess how consistent exposures and framing remain across a complete roll. For camera-scanning products, I also pay close attention to alignment, light uniformity, and how repeatable the setup is.
Finally, I consider the complete cost of getting from a negative to a finished image. That includes not just the scanner or film holder, but any required camera equipment, software, or accessories. The best option is the one that gives the quality you actually need through a workflow you're willing to use repeatedly.
Deals
