Nikon D850 Film Scanner

[almoore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the fact that Nikon have introduced both software and hardware to help people scan film negatives is obviously not of interest to some people on the forum, and there seems to be a resistance to admitting it might be to do with a perceived growing need amongst photographers generally.

It's definitely of interest to me, but I remain sceptical of how significant it is.

 

Nothing would please me more than a real surge in film use - although I can't see it happening - because that would also create a market for new scanner development. I've come close to buying a Hasselblad scanner on multiple occasions, but ultimately I can't justify the cost and carry on with my shagged out old Coolscan.

Edited August 25, 2017 by almoore

[plasticman]

It's definitely of interest to me, but I remain sceptical of how significant it is.

I don't think it's particularly interesting as a product. I do think it's significant as an indication of trends.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[philipus]

I agree. I just wish manufacturers would turn those trends into equipment.

 

As I see it, there's a massive gaping hole in the scanner market from around 2000 Eur, where the Opticfilm 120 lives, to 16000 Eur which is the X1. 

 

I am continually amazed that none of the current or previous scanner manufacturers, like Nikon, Minolta, Hasselblad etc, or current camera manufacturers with a strong commitment to film, like our dear Leica, puts out a scanner in the 3000-5000 Eur range. I even emailed with Hasselblad about this but they seemed not to see the point.

 

In fact Leica is the completely logical choice for a scanner. They have the optical know-how and a very strong engineering background plus a visionary leadership willing to take the brand into new areas of equipment. I mean, look at the product portfolio today and compare it with how it looked just less than ten years ago. In 2008 there was no SL, no T, no X models, no S, no Monochrom. Most of those models have actually come in the last few years.

 

One can but hope.

 

Philip

[wattsy]

I agree with the logic Philip but I'm not sure Leica can deliver a scanner product into the price bracket you are looking at (other than rebadging another manufacturer's product but that will just mean a more costly existing product, not something new). The last time they tried to do something similar was the very expensive digital projector they sold for around £8000 around the time of the M8.2. Admittedly not a scanner but it was a product that is similarly tangentially relevant to their camera line and for which Leica presumably thought they had identified a market opportunity. As far as I know it flopped badly and Leica may feel burned by the experience.

 

Personally I think the hole in the market is for a quality 35mm scanner (with quality software and accessories like film holders, etc.) that would sell for around £2,000 but I don't think Leica could meet that price point. Nikon would probably struggle too.

Edited August 25, 2017 by wattsy

[chrism]

Somebody somewhere still owns the patents on the Konica Minolta 5400 series of scanners - small, fast and really quite good. Surely easier to get them produced again rather than start from scratch?

 

Chris

[Reeray]

I prefer this route to digitising my film. No bulbs or electronics to blow out with nobody to repair, plus I can digitise a 36 shot roll in 10 minutes. Total cost of Beoon and Componon S enlarger lens was $400. I already had the camera.

 

Leica Beoon

Edited August 26, 2017 by Reeray

[thrid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree. I just wish manufacturers would turn those trends into equipment.

 

As I see it, there's a massive gaping hole in the scanner market from around 2000 Eur, where the Opticfilm 120 lives, to 16000 Eur which is the X1. 

 

I am continually amazed that none of the current or previous scanner manufacturers, like Nikon, Minolta, Hasselblad etc, or current camera manufacturers with a strong commitment to film, like our dear Leica, puts out a scanner in the 3000-5000 Eur range. I even emailed with Hasselblad about this but they seemed not to see the point.

 

In fact Leica is the completely logical choice for a scanner. They have the optical know-how and a very strong engineering background plus a visionary leadership willing to take the brand into new areas of equipment. I mean, look at the product portfolio today and compare it with how it looked just less than ten years ago. In 2008 there was no SL, no T, no X models, no S, no Monochrom. Most of those models have actually come in the last few years.

 

One can but hope.

 

Philip

 

 

You would think that both Kodak and Ilford would realize that in the internet age the survival of film depends on the availability of good quality film scanners that do not cost as much as a new car. Kodak in particular should be able to design direct replacements for the 5000ED / 9000ED in their sleep.

 

Ever since Nikon killed the 5000ED / 9000ED there has been a massive gap between low-cost scanners like the Plustek units (sub $1000) and the Hasselblad X1 / X5 @ $16,000 - $25,000. Yes there are a few units in-between, but by all accounts none of them can match the discontinued 9000ED, which came close to the X1.

 

Kodak really needs to step in here

Edited August 28, 2017 by thrid

[plasticman]

You would think that both Kodak and Ilford would realize that in the internet age the survival of film depends on the availability of good quality film scanners that do not cost as much as a new car. Kodak in particular should be able to design direct replacements for the 5000ED / 9000ED in their sleep.

 

Ever since Nikon killed the 5000ED / 9000ED there has been a massive gap between low-cost scanners like the Plustek units (sub $1000) and the Hasselblad X1 / X5 @ $16,000 - $25,000. Yes there are a few units in-between, but by all accounts none of them can match the discontinued 9000ED, which came close to the X1.

 

Kodak really needs to step in here

Agree 100%, it's just simply astounding to me that film-manufacturers haven't understood this (yet) - it's an essential part of their overall survival. Right now - at least where I live - there's a real and exciting groundswell of hobby interest in analog processes: film, vinyl, even 'analog' cooking - and film is making a niche comeback*

But to sustain this rising popularity, film manufacturers need to make it easier to cross the analog/digital barrier. Too many of my recent discussions go like this:

 

other person: "I found a Plaubel Makina for a great price - that's a good camera right?"

me: "Wow! that's a GREAT camera! Buy it definitely!"

(three weeks later)

other person: "I'm loving the scans from the lab, but they're really expensive - I need to get my own scanner. What model do you have?"

me: "well...(embarrassed silence) it's complicated"

other person: "What do you recommend then?"

me: "well... (embarrassed silence) it's complicated"

 

* important to note: I'm not making claims about a general, popular revival - this is just a niche hobby popularity - about like DSLR cameras in the near future

[2wk]

Idealy the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i...right? But the Epsons (750 or 850) do a really good job with 6x7 film. Especially with the wet mount kit.

 

 

Agree 100%, it's just simply astounding to me that film-manufacturers haven't understood this (yet) - it's an essential part of their overall survival. Right now - at least where I live - there's a real and exciting groundswell of hobby interest in analog processes: film, vinyl, even 'analog' cooking - and film is making a niche comeback*

But to sustain this rising popularity, film manufacturers need to make it easier to cross the analog/digital barrier. Too many of my recent discussions go like this:

 

other person: "I found a Plaubel Makina for a great price - that's a good camera right?"

me: "Wow! that's a GREAT camera! Buy it definitely!"

(three weeks later)

other person: "I'm loving the scans from the lab, but they're really expensive - I need to get my own scanner. What model do you have?"

me: "well...(embarrassed silence) it's complicated"

other person: "What do you recommend then?"

me: "well... (embarrassed silence) it's complicated"

 

* important to note: I'm not making claims about a general, popular revival - this is just a niche hobby popularity - about like DSLR cameras in the near future

 

[Stealth3kpl]

You would think that both Kodak and Ilford would realize that in the internet age the survival of film depends on the availability of good quality film scanners that do not cost as much as a new car. Kodak in particular should be able to design direct replacements for the 5000ED / 9000ED in their sleep.

 

 

Kodak produced my Pakon F135+ scanner

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1385/3595/products/Untitled-1_2048x2048.jpg?v=1478193101

 

It is astounding in that I can scan c41 36 exposures to 3000 x 2000 pixels 17Mb Tiffs in less than 5 minutes. That's the whole roll! Kodak were an incredible company with outstanding engineers who thought outside the box. No fannying about with negative carriers and strips of 6 negatives, it just sucks the whole film through. Have a look at some videos on youtube. It has been done for 35mm, and they produced something for medium format too. All the engineering is out there. We just need a company, maybe Leica with Kodak Alaris and Ilford to get together.

You'll read alot of people saying the Pakon is a game changer. It is for small file and quickly viewing what's on a roll. It has made me consider selling my M-P240 . I was lucky that I took a risk and bought mine a couple of years ago when prices were around the $250 mark. Nowadays people try to sell them for over $1000. This is superb but old technology running on Windows XP.

Pete

[larsv]

Would this work on the SL with adapter? The Nikon, I mean.

Edited August 28, 2017 by larsv

[almoore]

Agree 100%, it's just simply astounding to me that film-manufacturers haven't understood this (yet) - it's an essential part of their overall survival. Right now - at least where I live - there's a real and exciting groundswell of hobby interest in analog processes: film, vinyl, even 'analog' cooking - and film is making a niche comeback*

But to sustain this rising popularity, film manufacturers need to make it easier to cross the analog/digital barrier...

There is a relatively simple way to cross that barrier that comes in at a cost way less than a Flextight - at least for black and white. Just put together a simple darkroom and make wet prints for flatbed scanning. 

[plasticman]

There is a relatively simple way to cross that barrier that comes in at a cost way less than a Flextight - at least for black and white. Just put together a simple darkroom and make wet prints for flatbed scanning. 

That's just not a realistic option for people like me or my contemporaries. It would be a nice dream, but it's not happening.

 

Having said that, the dad from nursery that I don't bump into often is an enthusiastic club darkroom user - he is the type of guy that really throws himself wholesale into his activities. But for most of us, with job, kids, after- school stuff, limited space and other hobbies, the hybrid workflow is the only realistic way.

[plasticman]

...the hybrid workflow is the only realistic way.

Haha it's probably bad form to quote myself, but I just wanted to add: it's also the desirable way. 

 

For me and most of the people I know, the final form for our images is online, printed on a personal digital printer, or print-on-demand in the form of Blurb books (or similar). It's not just laziness - I promise.

[almoore]

That's just not a realistic option for people like me or my contemporaries. It would be a nice dream, but it's not happening....

And that's also why a genuine resurgence of film isn't happening.

 

I'd encourage anybody who's never made a wet print to give it a go. You might find that what it offers outweighs the inconvenience. I've never seen a black and white digital print from a scanned negative that has the beauty of a darkroom print, although I have seen some lovely prints that came from the unlikely path of neg, followed by wet print, followed by flatbed scan, followed by further production work, before final digital print output.

[plasticman]

And that's also why a genuine resurgence of film isn't happening.

Frankly, I have absolutely no idea what your criteria are for a "genuine resurgence". I have a feeling that this thread has run its constructive course (at least for me).

[almoore]

Frankly, I have absolutely no idea what your criteria are for a "genuine resurgence". I have a feeling that this thread has run its constructive course (at least for me).

Equally frankly, I have absolutely no idea why this is such an apparently sensitive subject for you. We both like film, one of us thinks a real resurgence is underway, the other thinks that there might be a few more sales than there were a couple of years ago but that it's no more than a blip.

 

But you're probably right, nothing constructive is coming from this.

[mmradman]

Y

 

Would this work on the SL with adapter? The Nikon, I mean.

Yes it would work with SL601, of course RAW DNG file would have to be processed outside the camera.

 

Typical hardware setup:-

 

SL601 or M240 or M10.

L-F or L-M & M-F adaptor.

Nikon Micro lens, AiS 55mm f2.8 or AFD 60mm f2.8

Old SL-1 or new SL-2 film copier or even Macro Bellows.

Sturdy clamp/tripod and light source.

 

It would also work with other SLR slide copy equipment combining bellows, macro lens and film copy holder - have a look in good stocked second hand shops.

[mmradman]

Here is earlier attempt with Nikon copying gear, old slide scanned with D700+PB6+Micro Nikkor 55mm f2.8 Ai-S+PS-6

Originally photographed with Olympus IS1000.

  

Rachael, circa 2000 by Mladen Radman, on Flickr

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest]

Here is a thread on digitalizing slide film with the BEOON + M10 + Focotar 2 lens, with some examples, including the one below of a Kodachrome 25 slide, which I think is a good example of digitalizing a dense slide, although I haven't been posting family pictures.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!