A modern 35mm film scanner for home

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Price, Market Position & Value

  • Many commenters consider €999 (early) / €1599 (retail) very expensive for a 35mm-only scanner, especially versus:
    • Used Plustek / Pacific Image / Epson flatbeds in the $300–$700 range.
    • DIY DSLR/mirrorless copy-stand setups that can be built for a few hundred or less if you already own a camera.
  • Some see the price as reasonable versus old lab gear (Pakon, Nikon Coolscan 5000/9000, Imacon) or for heavy users/labs, but several say they’d have impulse-bought at ~$500.
  • A recurring sentiment: “nice object, but it seems aimed at a small, affluent niche rather than solving the biggest unmet needs (medium format, bulk/family archiving).”

Image Quality, Optics & Electronics

  • Concerns:
    • Lower effective DPI than some existing scanners.
    • No infrared channel for dust/scratch detection is repeatedly called a dealbreaker.
    • RGB LED backlight is viewed as a missed opportunity (no IR, uncertain color rendering); some argue narrow-band RGB can be powerful if done correctly, others call it “terrible” for color fidelity.
  • Claimed dynamic range (20 stops) is noted as better than typical consumer scanners (12), but several want proof via sample scans before believing any specs.
  • Long subthread on 35mm resolving power:
    • Estimates ranging from ~5 MP “good enough” to ~20 MP “lossless,” with mention of ultra-fine emulsions claiming far higher theoretical resolution.
    • Consensus that in practice lenses, film flatness, and development limit usable detail; beyond ~4000 dpi you mostly resolve grain/dye clouds.

Workflow, Mechanics & Formats

  • Positive: continuous roll transport and the ability to scan uncut rolls; attractive for home developers and labs compared to slow, manual Plustek/Epson workflows.
  • However:
    • Film flatness and focus across warped or old negatives are seen as the real hard problem; people discuss drum/“virtual drum” approaches, ANR glass, and focus stacking.
    • 35mm-only support is a major negative; many say they’d only consider it if it handled 120/4×5, since medium format scanning options are scarce and expensive.
  • Dust is repeatedly cited as the main pain point; without IR dust mapping, users expect a lot of manual cleanup.

Software, Openness & Longevity

  • Strong approval for plans to:
    • Publish hardware schematics and repair manuals.
    • Open‑source the Korova control software for Windows/macOS/Linux and support it long term.
  • Several contrast this positively with aging but revered hardware (Nikon Coolscan, Canon, Minolta) that now require archaic OSes, SCSI/FireWire, and third‑party tools (VueScan, SilverFast).

Website, Marketing & Credibility

  • Many are frustrated by the scroll‑hijacking, slow animations, and difficulty accessing content; some couldn’t view the page at all.
  • Skepticism because:
    • No real-world sample scans or comparison images are shown; some Instagram examples are described as poor.
    • “Specifications” appear more like design goals; a few call it “vaporware” or “concept-heavy, product-light.”
  • A minority applaud the ambition and are simply glad to see any new dedicated scanner project in 2025, hoping it pressures incumbents to improve.