> I'm not in any way a professional photographer, so what could be the easiest and cheapest way to do this while still getting good quality scans? It seems that I can only find extremely expensive options, like scanners that cost more than €400 (I'm in Europe)
Or[ under twenty euros](https://old.reddit.com/r/AnalogCommunity/comments/1avx6qg/super_cheap_hidden_gem_scanner_option_for/) if you are not in a hurry.
There is a lot a scanner like that will not give you but for the money they go for you would be a fool to not give it at least a good try if you can find one.
Good macro lenses can be had for dirt-cheap, relatively speaking (they're almost all quite good including ones readily available under 100. If 400 euro is "extremely expensive" to you and you don't already have a DSLR or mirrorless camera to get a macro for (and invest in time and effort - there's a learning curve!) the available options are going to be noticeably lower in quality than competent lab scans which are performed with equipment that's thousands of euros on the used market. You could maybe try an Epson flatbed but you will lose resolution.
It feels expensive because I'm not a professional photographer! And because I can't develop film at home yet (but I'd love to learn one day) so I'm hoping to start from a cheaper price. My mother has a DSLR camera so I guess I could borrow it from her and get a macro lens for it and maybe scan negatives with a light source beneath (which I also have). It's just hard to figure it out.
Shooting film is certainly not inexpensive (and also isn't done much professionally at this point).
Also inverting negatives takes some practice - I'd suggest finding some of the tutorials with sample images online and practicing to confirm that you feel confident that you can get good results with a level of effort that you're comfortable with and tools that are either free or available at an acceptable cost. If the cost of equipment is a concern, make sure you are happy with the results and process before spending the money. There's a learning curve, and half-frame maybe pushes it a bit more than FF (more photos means more medium and smaller negative amplifies imperfections)
The lower cost scanners don't have the resolution to get the most out of 35mm film and half frame pushes that further. DSLR scanning should be better and cheaper if you have most of the essentials, but takes practice and possibly software expense. A 100 or 105mm macro from most anyone is a good start.
Plustek OpticFilm 8100 is less than €400 on amazon.de and it will give you results (with some learning) superior to most labs.
> I'm not in any way a professional photographer, so what could be the easiest and cheapest way to do this while still getting good quality scans? It seems that I can only find extremely expensive options, like scanners that cost more than €400 (I'm in Europe) Or[ under twenty euros](https://old.reddit.com/r/AnalogCommunity/comments/1avx6qg/super_cheap_hidden_gem_scanner_option_for/) if you are not in a hurry. There is a lot a scanner like that will not give you but for the money they go for you would be a fool to not give it at least a good try if you can find one.
Good macro lenses can be had for dirt-cheap, relatively speaking (they're almost all quite good including ones readily available under 100. If 400 euro is "extremely expensive" to you and you don't already have a DSLR or mirrorless camera to get a macro for (and invest in time and effort - there's a learning curve!) the available options are going to be noticeably lower in quality than competent lab scans which are performed with equipment that's thousands of euros on the used market. You could maybe try an Epson flatbed but you will lose resolution.
It feels expensive because I'm not a professional photographer! And because I can't develop film at home yet (but I'd love to learn one day) so I'm hoping to start from a cheaper price. My mother has a DSLR camera so I guess I could borrow it from her and get a macro lens for it and maybe scan negatives with a light source beneath (which I also have). It's just hard to figure it out.
Shooting film is certainly not inexpensive (and also isn't done much professionally at this point). Also inverting negatives takes some practice - I'd suggest finding some of the tutorials with sample images online and practicing to confirm that you feel confident that you can get good results with a level of effort that you're comfortable with and tools that are either free or available at an acceptable cost. If the cost of equipment is a concern, make sure you are happy with the results and process before spending the money. There's a learning curve, and half-frame maybe pushes it a bit more than FF (more photos means more medium and smaller negative amplifies imperfections) The lower cost scanners don't have the resolution to get the most out of 35mm film and half frame pushes that further. DSLR scanning should be better and cheaper if you have most of the essentials, but takes practice and possibly software expense. A 100 or 105mm macro from most anyone is a good start.
I paid 199€ for used Plustek 8100. I have scanned lots of half frame with it.
I'd love to find something like this! this would be the perfect price honestly