dkCambridgeshire Posted August 9, 2006 Share #21 Posted August 9, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) This link has several scanner reviews: http://www.photo-i.co.uk/ Dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 9, 2006 Posted August 9, 2006 Hi dkCambridgeshire, Take a look here Scanner advice needed. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pierovitch Posted August 10, 2006 Share #22 Posted August 10, 2006 I have found I get better results than the coolscan LS-1000 and epson4870 using a digital SLR, Leica bellows and Zeiss Luminar macro lens. I attribute this to more than adequate dynamic range, Less sensitive to scratches and grain and therefore no need for time consuming post processing which effectively undoes the high resolution advantage. Leica digital back, Leica photar or apo macro should be equal to or better this combo. Just a bit over that budget limit if you don't have the items. Cheers Pierre Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
francofile Posted August 10, 2006 Share #23 Posted August 10, 2006 Hi Andrew, I've used Vuescan for the last 7 years or so. There's a learning curve, but once you are comfortable with the product it puts a lot of options at your disposal. Thanks Steve and Andy for the advice. VueScan and I are begining to get to know each other - I anticipate a long and happy relationship. Thanks again. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_dykstra Posted August 11, 2006 Share #24 Posted August 11, 2006 What? No votes for the Konica Minolta 5400 Mk II? Produces 42 megapixel images from a 35 mm negative? Works pretty well for me. But won't do bulk scanning as easily as the Nikon, with it's roll film and slide feeder features/accessories. Search the archives for my review of the 5400 II - a year or so ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 11, 2006 Share #25 Posted August 11, 2006 Is that in jpg mode, Rick? The Nikon does 125MB tiffs from a neg/slide In my experience, the Minoltas are not built to the same quality as the Nikons. (And are probably unobtainable in the market now, anyway... ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredrik Posted August 11, 2006 Share #26 Posted August 11, 2006 Hello John I just like to give you a hint that LFI 3/2005 have had a very good test on scanners below 500EUR. They even have done test of diff. films (B/W) to scan. For the B/W test they used a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400. It is remarkely how the result is differing from wich film to scan. Ref LF/ 2/2005. And so LFI 4/2005 is running a test on scanners from 500EUR to 1000EUR. All in all they favoured Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400, to a value of 900 EUR. Good luck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 11, 2006 Share #27 Posted August 11, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi Fredrik, the 5400 was a very good scanner, but it's only available now as a used item since Sony decided not to continue production - there may be one or two unsold in shops, but they're no longer on general sale. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkness30 Posted August 11, 2006 Share #28 Posted August 11, 2006 Another vote for Nikon Coolscan V here. Regards, Mehmet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick_dykstra Posted August 12, 2006 Share #29 Posted August 12, 2006 Hi Andy. The 5400 II produces 42 mega pixel images of around 115 mega bytes in 8 bit mode. I would agree that it is not made to the same standard of robustness or industrial utility as the Nikon. Still, it costs less and produces higher res images - hence my decision to buy it for non intensive use. I'd look at the Nikon again if my needs were for higher volume scanning. :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted August 12, 2006 Share #30 Posted August 12, 2006 Rick - my apologies. I misread your post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinb Posted August 12, 2006 Share #31 Posted August 12, 2006 4000 dpi or maybe even 3200 dpi is more than enough for scanning film. There simply isn't more resolution in the film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted August 12, 2006 Share #32 Posted August 12, 2006 Minolta or Coolscan V it depends on the film which should be scanned in a bigger qty. Due to the harsh? light from the Nikon, b/w negatives are not so easy to scan compare to the 'soft' light of the Minolta. And there is a small acessory from the Netherlands which upgrades the Minolta in terms of scratch-reduction etc. of regular b/w negatives: http://www.scanhancer.com/ Pls. look to my flickr page, you can see some bad, good and very bad results of scanning with the Nikon V - without reading the manual... Regards Bernd Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pleeson Posted August 13, 2006 Share #33 Posted August 13, 2006 Another vote for the Coolscan/VueScan combo. And pay the $$ for the pro version of Vuescan, de-install the crummy Nikon Scan program. You'll be set for life... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micheal Posted August 15, 2006 Share #34 Posted August 15, 2006 Martin B, A high end Imacon (out of my price range) will produce a approx. 230 MB file from a 35mm negative. There is a whole lot of subtle information there . The Nikon Coolpix will get you about 128 Megs. The Nikon 9000 which has the same specs as the Coolscan V will do the Hasselblad XPan & 35mm as well. I use a Coolscan IV on one system and the 9000 on the other. As for software, Silverfast is considered far superior to VueScan in the states & from personal use. I have to use both, as VueScan is installed in the teaching labs we use in the Art dept. I really find VuesCan clunky & somewhat like using windows XP. Andy B. disagrees with me on this point. And, I respect his opinion. Sincerely, Michael Dickey Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrosell Posted August 15, 2006 Share #35 Posted August 15, 2006 I have recently aquired a Nikon Coolscan LS-8000ED to use with a PowerMac G4. So far the Nikon Scan 4 software has caused problems with the Mac (locking when image scan files go above 10meg). Demo versions of Silverfast and VueScan have worked really well with the Nikon. Before I invest does anyone have any advice on the use of these or is there a better alternative? Andrew, I own a Nikon Supercoolscan 8000 ED, and maybe you could try Nikon software version 3. I used mine with a Powerbook G4 titanium (500 Mhz) without problems scanning 6x6cm or 6x9cm at 16 bits (actually 14) making huge files without any trouble at all. Only precaution is to use OSX (I have OSX 10.2.8 in the PBook) without having the Classic environment running at the time of scanning. For safety purposes it is even better to disconnect the internet when using the Coolscan so as to avoid any interference in the screen (which sometimes caused locking). Maybe this is the cause of the problem you have been facing. Other possible cause is the free memory of your hard disk and/or your scratch disk(s) – the larger the better. Otherwise I am just switching to SilverFast for my scanner. After quite some research I believe SilverFast is superior to ScanVue, and in any case much better than the Nikon software. Good luck, Horacio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micheal Posted August 15, 2006 Share #36 Posted August 15, 2006 JLancasterd, ps The " Las Vegas" series on my site was scanned with the LE4000 & Silverfast 6. The rest are from copy slides or digital files. Sincerely, Michael Dickey http://www.stardustgrafik.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted August 16, 2006 Share #37 Posted August 16, 2006 Just to add my NKR 0.02: I have a KM5400II and am pleased with it, have been for the 15 moths I've had it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted August 16, 2006 Share #38 Posted August 16, 2006 Reading this thread convinced me to download the trial version of Vuescan. I haven't tried it on my Coolscan V yet, but here's my first scan with the Microtek 4000tf. Seems to be a good program. I don't much like the watermarks though. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/2944-scanner-advice-needed/?do=findComment&comment=31858'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.