Sad News from Nikon

[miami91]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This sad news made me go a few rounds on Google for information about the Hasselblad / Imacons FlextightX1 and X5 film scanners. In particular, the smallest X1 is a very interesting device.

Superb machines and "sovereign" prices!

 

The Hasselblads are wonderful scanners. I recently purchased an X5 after having owned a Hassy 343 for the past 3.5 years. As a point of information though, there is nothing "small" (or smaller) about the X1. The physical dimensions of the X1 and X5 are identical, and they are large and heavy machines.

 

Jeff.

[Ulev]

Some people are using slide copy stands and similar devices along with a digital camera. It is very fast and you can batch process the raw files using all the controls that are in the latest raw processors.

 

I did borrow a friends macro lens and took pictures of negatives on a lighttable.

I am very happy with the results.

I just have to built myselve a small led "powered" lighttable because the one I was using had fluorescent lights and gave me some color shifting.

 

Have to figure a way now to hold negatives upright in combination with a led lightbox.

 

Compared to the second hand prices of Coolscans I am surely better of buying a macrolens myselve.

 

Rgds

Ulev

[aesop]

Some people are using slide copy stands and similar devices along with a digital camera. It is very fast and you can batch process the raw files using all the controls that are in the latest raw processors. I have a good Bowens Illumitron slide copier with a 60mm Schneider copy lens. Used with a 5DII the detail was just slightly below what I can get with my Polaroid Sprintscan 120T at 4000 dpi. But I think the color and exposure control is better, and it's much much faster. (You don't need to do a pre-scan, make adjustments and then make a hi res scan.) I'm going to see if using another lens or specific f stop will close the gap. One advantage is the additional depth of field from using this technique eliminates the need for glass film holders. The chief advantage is a huge increase in productivity.

 

 

...good shout, AlanG. Thanks.

[andybarton]

My experience with flat bed scanners have been hit or miss in the past, and was never a fan of the fiddly nature of the film loading and trays. That being said, I wonder if one of the Epson 700/750 scanners would not be a good candidate??? Anyone have any experience with those?

 

I have a Coolscan V for 35mm and an Epson v700 which I use for my Hasselblad film scans. I have been very pleased with both, for the purposes for which they were bought.

 

I have tried the v700 with some 35mm film and it is not as good as the Nikon, which is not surprising.

 

Next move will be to an Imacon.

[janki]

The Hasselblads are wonderful scanners. I recently purchased an X5 after having owned a Hassy 343 for the past 3.5 years. As a point of information though, there is nothing "small" (or smaller) about the X1. The physical dimensions of the X1 and X5 are identical, and they are large and heavy machines.

 

Jeff.

Thanks for this clarification Miami91.

 

It had obviously been the most reasonable for me to start seeking information from the manufacturer.

Hasselbladusa.com

There are several data sheets under products, and scanners ,.... and a small illustrative film clip.

 

Scanners and computers are apparently similar.

The price is determined from what’s inside, not external dimensions.

 

When I am reading that these scanners have lenses from Rodenstock, I get memories from the days of darkrooms and enlargers facilities.

 

I also understand that in order to scan slides in frames, one must choose X5.

X5 has a cooling fan as well. Active cooling is always good!

Hasselblad / Imacon X1 and X5 seems to be real "enlargers devices" to development of analog images in a modern digital "light-room”.

 

 

This thread is originally about Nikon that stops producing scanners.

 

Is it possible that Nikon have financial problems, since they now apparently, completely are leaving the scanner market, in which they have had a dominant position?

Seen from the outside, it seems as if Canon gets an increasingly dominant position in the market as supplier of cameras and optics.

[miami91]

 

I also understand that in order to scan slides in frames, one must choose X5.

X5 has a cooling fan as well. Active cooling is always good!

Hasselblad / Imacon X1 and X5 seems to be real "enlargers devices" to development of analog images in a modern digital "light-room”.

 

 

[

 

The batch slide feeder (an optional accessory) may only work with the X5, but there is a flextight original holder for either scanner that allows scanning of a slide (one at a time) without removal from the cardboard mount. This is very convenient.

 

Yes, the primary difference is the internals. The active cooling of the X5 allows it to operate about 3-4X as fast. The X5 also has greater resolution for 35mm (8000 dpi), and a slightly higher dmax. It also has a top light source (above the original) to allow scanning of reflectives, and has a light condensator which helps immensely with dust mitigation.

 

Jeff.

[Nikkor AIS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nikon has always been a smaller company than Canon. It's just a fact. I have no idea why they have discontinued the Nikon 9000 but to say it's because they are in financal trouble is speculative and completly unjustified.

 

Who knows why?. Perhaps there focusing on making there New D3s and Nikkor 24 1.4 ED AFS and 35 1.4 AFS ASPH .

And I know there always back ordered on there Super Telephoto's like the Nikkor 400 2.8 ED AFS nano VR , 500 4.0 ED AFS nano VR , and Nikkor 600 4.0 ED AFS Nano Vr

 

Gregory

[noah_addis]

I'm not really surprised--or maybe I am. After all, while there is a smaller market for these scanners than when they were introduced, they seem to sell out quickly wherever they're in stock.

 

The LS9000 is a great scanner and an even better value for the price. I've tried the Imacon and Hasselblad scanners and it's very close--especially for 120 since at that size the Hasselblads max out at a claimed 3200dpi. The Nikon's claimed 4000dpi isn't quite accurate, but nevertheless the scans from the machine are very good if you can get the film flat enough, which is more of a problem with 120.

 

Even though the LS9000 is quite good, I wanted to really pull the most from my negs for large prints, and I also wanted to scan 4x5. I looked into the Hasselblads and used Imacons, but the prices were quite high.

 

For less than half the price of a new X1 and less than what many Imacon 848s or even 646s go for on Ebay, I got a used Howtek HiResolve 8000 drum scanner. I actually made my first large prints today from drum scans, and I had previously printed the same photos scanned by the Nikon. I was surprised by how big of a difference there was. The drum scans are probably only slightly sharper, but they're sharp all across the frame, the color and tonality are better and the prints are much less grainy.

 

The Howteks are still serviced by Aztek and the parts are available (especially for the HR8000, which shares many parts with the Aztek Premier).

 

There are some real advantages to drum scanning. The workflow is great. You can load up a bunch of negatives, set the color for each scan then walk away while the machine batch scans. I can do nine 6x7's at once but you could fit a whole lot of 35mm frames. The biggest advantage is being able to change the scanning aperture to control grain. If you shoot color negative this is a HUGE advantage. Of course, if you shoot chromes or B&W, the drum scanner can pull detail out of dense areas much better than any ccd scanner.

 

The only real downside is that you need some space to set it up and you need to learn to mount your negs on the drum. It's not hard--in fact it's kind of fun. It gives you some of the tactile experience of working in the darkroom:D.

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Andy and RT, I just discovered this thread after dragging a new cs9000 home from the store today. until now I have been using a V700 for my 120, im in shock and contemplating rescanning a lot of favorite negatives.

 

Completely un-qualified assessment... not sure one have to jump to a imacon from the v700, the 9000 might be a very qualified step up.

 

Sorry to hear these things are really vanishing from the market. hopefully some smaller company will find a lucrative niche making high-volume scanners for amateur users. one figure there should be a market until the last M3 dies.

 

 

.

[norbertnl]

According to the data sheet on the Hasselblad website (uk_x5_x1_datasheet_v2.pdf), the X5 accepts a smaller film format than the X1: 100x245 instead of 120x245. This would mean that with an X5, the 4x5 format can't be properly scanned. Does anyone have practical experience with this? Or is it just a mistake on the Hasselblad website?

Best,

Norbert

[brt]

norbertnl,

 

the X5 holder for 4x5 scans 9.95cm x 12.60cm.

The holder with the biggest scannable area for film is 9.95cm x 27.00cm.

 

brt

[Xmas]

Sorry to hear these things are really vanishing from the market. hopefully some smaller company will find a lucrative niche making high-volume scanners for amateur users. one figure there should be a market until the last M3 dies.

Hi Bo

 

I'd not be that optimistic the whole film dependent industry needs to shrink. My large pharmacy 5km away still has a shelf for film, mono 35mm as well as 24 C41 color, so there are still casual 35mm users, in a 25km circle from my home.

 

But high end scanners will be squeezed hard e,g, like 220 mono film, I have a dedicated back to sell soon only 25 rolls in fridge. Any of the smaller film suppliers could package 220 it is so similar to 120, but I'm not optimistic, they are driven by the middle men who don't like perishable commodities. More profit probably in two x 120 than one 220 does not help either... The last batch of 220 I got was a lot more expensive than previous purchase as well.

 

Noel

[tgray]

Noah - can I come to your place and scan some of my negs?

 

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Noel,

 

LOL.. yeah you are probably right. still I suspect once the industry is done re-working itself, somehow we will still be scanning images, maybe by a macro attachment to my M10 to photograph negatives and slides, maybe using auto-bracket for dynamic range in the film. I don't really care as long as the file is sharp and clearly defining the grain in the film. :-)

 

Im about 10 minutes from Samy's in Los Angeles and 15 minutes from Freestyle (which is where I picked up the cs9000) so it is not quite yet time to say my local store do not stock film... yet.

 

.

[bocaburger]

Using long-discontinued Canon 4000dpi for 35mm, V700 for medium( bought because I also needed it for 4x5) sold my 9000 (probably should have waited for the price to go up ). The aftermarket holder for the V700, plus careful adjustment of the holder focus adjustment, and I found it was actually much sharper than my 9000. dMax is a little better on the 9000, to be fair, but not enough. I've used my 5D on a copy stand with a slide duper too, it's definitely faster, and slowness is the one thing about film and scanning I really dislike.

[Steve Ash]

It might be that there are other solutions in sight. Have a look at the top right side of the following link:

 

https://reflecta-shop.de/en/downloads/~nm.28~nc.50~did.5~nm.28~nc.50/Film-.-Diascanner-nicht-aktuelle-Modelle.html

 

Regards

Steve

[Xmas]

Noel,

 

LOL.. yeah you are probably right. still I suspect once the industry is done re-working itself, somehow we will still be scanning images, maybe by a macro attachment to my M10 to photograph negatives and slides, maybe using auto-bracket for dynamic range in the film. I don't really care as long as the file is sharp and clearly defining the grain in the film. :-)

 

Im about 10 minutes from Samy's in Los Angeles and 15 minutes from Freestyle (which is where I picked up the cs9000) so it is not quite yet time to say my local store do not stock film... yet.

 

.

 

Hi Bo

 

Scanners may become collector items doubling in $ over three years, but the manufacturers may not bother to restart.

 

Although Nikon did rgfrs 40 years after they stopped, and Cosina started doing rfdrs & LTM lenses. Who knows what will happen.

 

Noel

[chrism]

Bo,

Congratulations on scoring a 9000. If you use medium format at all, try to find the glass negative holder for 120 film before they become unobtainable too.

 

Chris

[janki]

Nikon has always been a smaller company than Canon. It's just a fact. I have no idea why they have discontinued the Nikon 9000 but to say it's because they are in financal trouble is speculative and completly unjustified.

 

Who knows why?. Perhaps there focusing on making there New D3s and Nikkor 24 1.4 ED AFS and 35 1.4 AFS ASPH .

And I know there always back ordered on there Super Telephoto's like the Nikkor 400 2.8 ED AFS nano VR , 500 4.0 ED AFS nano VR , and Nikkor 600 4.0 ED AFS Nano Vr

 

Gregory

Yes, of course, I agree with that statement. My attitude is that one should be careful about speculation.

 

In connection with all the commotion surrounding the cancellation of the Leica R series, many of you will remember that the term "shark pool" was used.

 

"Financial crisis" is certainly not over.

 

The whole world seems to be a "shark pool". Eat or be eaten. I do not like this chase at all! I am a peaceful person.

 

I have started to look for a new digital SLR brand, since it was clear that there never would be any digital R.

 

Photography is a hobby for me. I cannot switch equipment and camera system continuously. When I decide to buy into a system, I would like it to exist for many years. So it will be for most amateurs.

 

Nikon is for me perhaps the most obvious camera-brand to consider, when I am going to buy new “digital” camera equipment.

Therefore, I thought for a moment when I first saw the sad news in this thread,

"not again"! Perhaps they are also in serious trouble now?

 

You're right Nikkor AIS.

Let us hope that this most likely means, that they only want to focus even more on making attractive cameras and lenses.

 

For each "species" that disappears, the world is a poorer place to exist.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[chris_livsey]

like 220 mono film, I have a dedicated back to sell soon only 25 rolls in fridge. Any of the smaller film suppliers could package 220 it is so similar to 120, but I'm not optimistic, they are driven by the middle men who don't like perishable commodities. More profit probably in two x 120 than one 220 does not help either... The last batch of 220 I got was a lot more expensive than previous purchase as well.

 

Noel

 

Noel you may be interested in these posts from Ilford on another forum.

 

220 Film Petition / Reply From ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology [Archive] - APUG

 

There have been more recent posts to the same end, this was the most comprehensive explanation.