harrisfoto Posted December 14, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) After attending a 1/2 day session sponsored by on the Flextight X5 scanner, I started wondering why Leica never made a film scanner. They have the lens technology. They can get the digital sensor from Kodak, Any digital camera raw processor could be used. They have a large customer group dedicated to film. Hasselblad sells the x5 for almost $20k Could they build an adapter for the new S series to make digital copies of film? Do the members of this forum think they should make a scanner or an adapter for the S to copy film? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 14, 2009 Posted December 14, 2009 Hi harrisfoto, Take a look here Should Leica make a film scanner?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
moikle Posted December 14, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 14, 2009 Indeed a Leica scanner would be a good product. I suspect it is not feasible due to the relatively small pro market for these items. I wonder how many Hasselblad make per year? Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted December 14, 2009 Share #3 Posted December 14, 2009 Although I fear what the cost might be, I agree absolutely Leica should build a film scanner. I worry about the day my Coolscan 9000 gives up the ghost. At some point, Leica's analog camera sales might be affected if there isn't a reasonable scanner option available to folks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted December 14, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 14, 2009 It would be too expensive if Leica made it. A flat bed can be used to post scanned negs. That said, they should give them away with new film M cameras, one to a customer. They should get into the film and photopaper business or subsidise someone who is. Then again film is half dead. 150 m cameras a month vs orders for 9000 digital M. What does that tell you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhabedi Posted December 14, 2009 Share #5 Posted December 14, 2009 http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/98718-leica-film-scanner-would-you-buy.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted December 14, 2009 Share #6 Posted December 14, 2009 Whether Leica makes a decent film scanner or not, judging from the number of "which film scanner to buy" threads on this forum, someone definitely should! The usual advice is to buy a Nikon 5000 or 9000 and then to mention that they are no-longer in production ... and the software is no-longer supported. It beats me why Nikon don't produce them to order. Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe D. Posted December 14, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Do the members of this forum think they should make a scanner or an adapter for the S to copy film? Why ? Do you think Herr Doktor A. Kaufmann should invest, and eventually loose, more money ? As you said, Hasselbad make one, the Flextight X5 is a good and very expensive one. Is it maybe not good enough ? Or, do you have a Nikon Super CoolScan 9000 ED ? If not, why not ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe D. Posted December 14, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 14, 2009 The usual advice is to buy a Nikon 5000 or 9000 and then to mention that they are no-longer in production ... and the software is no-longer supported Mike, I just had a look at Nikon web site. on Sept. 9th 2009 : Compatibility with Mac OS X 10.6 (« Snow Leopard ») (Update). on Sept. 19th. : Compatibility with Windows 7 (Update). The CoolScan V ED is unfortunately no more in production. It is a very good 24x36 scanner indeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
josephgalilee Posted December 14, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 14, 2009 Bravo Edi Wetz! I saw your pictures and I liked especially those such as "crosswalk", where the painterly look and feel take precedence on the meaning. I want to ask the reason for which you sell the M8-2 with the 28 Elmarit. Are you tired from digital hangover? Thank you for the attention. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhabedi Posted December 14, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 14, 2009 Bravo Edi Wetz! I saw your pictures and I liked especially those such as "crosswalk", where the painterly look and feel take precedence on the meaning. Thanks a lot, I'm flattered. And what you say about the painterly look taking precedence on the meaning is a very good description of what I'm trying to achieve in these photos. It's "Weitz", BTW... I want to ask the reason for which you sell the M8-2 with the 28 Elmarit. Are you tired from digital hangover? Digital hangover would again be a good description... I'm thankful to digital photography because it rekindled my interest in taking pictures last year. But it also started a brief period of "gear lust" in which I not only bought the M8.2 but also a Ricoh GX200, a Panasonic G1, and a Sigma DP-1, albeit most of them used and for far less money then what I paid for the M8.2. In the end, I found out that I was looking for the "perfect" digital camera for me and that it doesn't exist (yet). I briefly thought the X1 could be this thing, but not anymore. A "hybrid" workflow (using my old M4-P which has been with me since 1996 and a scanner) currently works much better for me and I haven't touched my digital cameras much, if at all, in the last months. I've sold two already and now the M8.2 is for sale as well. Maybe I'll buy an M9 sometime in the future, but certainly not now. Oh, and the 28mm Elmarit is on sale because I explicitly bought it for the crop factor of the M8.2. I've never used it on the M4-P. Sorry to everyone else for the off-topic deviation... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jalLee2001 Posted December 14, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 14, 2009 I would love it if they did make a scanner. It would enable people to invest in the equipment with more confidence Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 14, 2009 Share #12 Posted December 14, 2009 I think I'd rather see a new scanner from Kodak or Fuji or a higher end Epson model. Leica would effectively be buying in much of the components and the cost of the end product would probably be too prohibitive for many users. I'll be amazed if someone doesn't address this gap in the market fairly soon - a market which I think has evolved over the years from being a requirement to digitize film as a higher quality alternative to the fairly low quality/high cost digital cameras originally, then for those who wanted to digitally archive their film images as they were switching over to digital cameras, and now the core of film users who are deciding to remain with film, as well as younger photographers who have started with digital and are taking up film photography as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcusperkins Posted December 14, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 14, 2009 There certainly needs to be something available - a lot of people shooting film will still want to digitise their results, and there is undoubtedly a growing interest in film, even if it is slow growing. As good as the X1 and X5 scanners are, they're just too expensive for most people, particularly if you're only shooting 35mm, and not making full use of the other larger format options. Whilst the Nikons are very good, there's a lot of uncertainty regarding their continued support. The software is starting to look dated at best - and as I understand it, third party software is not able to make full use of the ICE system available on those scanners. These units are also incredibly slow if you want a high quality scan, probably because the technology in these scanners must be getting on for 8 years old now. I don't want to necessarily scan a roll in 10 seconds, but it would be nice to get max quality from a neg within about the one minute mark - even five minutes would be a big improvement. The figures for the fastest scans on the now discontinued 35mm Nikon scanner may only be 38 seconds, but once you turn on ICE, and full multipass scanning, it can end up being nearer 15 minutes - Painful if you have to produce 10 - 20 high quality scans from an assignment, which is not so unusual. Additionally, black and white emulsions will probably have an increased share of the film market in future, so any new scanner would need the ability to clean up black and white negatives - which is not possible at the moment. I'd be up for a high quality 35mm Leica scanner in the 8,000 dpi range, but it would have to be under the £5,000 price mark and include all the available carriers for single, strip and roll batch scanning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 14, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 14, 2009 Hmm I was thinking a fraction of that price! Most users would I suspect be scanning for web or to print at home, mostly up to A4 size, some A3 (which my Epson flatbed does to good effect). So a dedicated film scanner of sufficient quality and resolution for that purpose. Of course there can be more expensive models for those who desire them, or professional use, such as the Hasselblad and drum scanners, but the mass market here is for an affordable scanner primarily aimed at the film enthusiast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcusperkins Posted December 14, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 14, 2009 But I don't think you're going to get a really good quality scanner for much less. As good as the Nikons are, they struggle with things like film flatness for critical scanning. Eeven on 35mm there's always a corner that is out of focus. Sure, there may not be much actual image data there, but the grain just looks wrong when scanned out of focus. Besides, there are a number of Epsons that will scan negs for the web, and probably fine for A5 and A4 use too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhabedi Posted December 14, 2009 Share #16 Posted December 14, 2009 But I don't think you're going to get a really good quality scanner for much less. As good as the Nikons are, they struggle with things like film flatness for critical scanning. Eeven on 35mm there's always a corner that is out of focus. Sure, there may not be much actual image data there, but the grain just looks wrong when scanned out of focus. How do the Hasselblad/Imacon scanners cope with this problem? Just curious, I've never seen one in real life. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcusperkins Posted December 14, 2009 Share #17 Posted December 14, 2009 How do the Hasselblad/Imacon scanners cope with this problem? Just curious, I've never seen one in real life. The film is bent across one axis which keeps it completely flat across the other axis, then rotated over the scanning head. In the Nikon, the film stays still, and the scanning head moves. Of course this is where Leica's engineering skills would really shine in figuring out a solid hardware solution that is totally dependable, but perhaps not as huge as the X series scanners which are almost as cavernous as an Apple tower, with a different shape, but of course you can scan 5x4 with it. Also, the X's don't use mirrors like the Nikon does. Everything is direct. The one disadvantage is the inability to scan slides in their holders, but then technically you'd be back to the film flatness problem. However, I imagine it would have to be pretty solid - you'd need real stability when scanning at 8,000 dpi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpattison Posted December 14, 2009 Share #18 Posted December 14, 2009 Marcus, I believe you have to cut your film into individual negatives to scan on a Hasselblad. Is this true? John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marcusperkins Posted December 14, 2009 Share #19 Posted December 14, 2009 You can scan a strip of six in a special holder, but it is certainly not capable of scanning a roll of 35mm in one go. However, I was wrong about mounted slides, you can scan them, but only with a special bulk scanner which only fits onto the X5, and I understand it is very expensive. Either of the X's are not particularly fast or cost efficient at scanning only 35mm. It's really more of a bureaux scanner. The X1 is cheaper than the X5. Many think the X5 is just faster (which it is), but the X5 also allows batch scans (with additional and expensive hardware, but not rolls of film), has a higher scanning resolution for 35mm 8,000dpi instead 6,300dpi (although both have the same 8,000dpi scanner head). The X5 also has a diffuser lens, and can scan reflective material. Fortunately it is quite easy to hire a work station by the hour, or for a day here in London, although I'd prefer something of that quality in my office, however, the cost simply does not make sense. A fully equipped X5 would be around the £24,000 mark. I would not buy the X1 because of its 'limitations' and relatively high cost. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhabedi Posted December 14, 2009 Share #20 Posted December 14, 2009 I believe you have to cut your film into individual negatives to scan on a Hasselblad. Is this true? As I said, I don't have one of these scanners. But I once had someone scan some negatives on an Imacon scanner (forgot which model) for me. He had to cut into 4-negative strips if I remember correctly. That'd be not nice but OK. Having to cut each roll into individual negatives would be inacceptable for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.