Better lens or better scanner - what first?

Florian1234 said:
Film and chemicals are not the problem.

So, now you tell me to get a better lens. This is just the opposite of what people over on flickr told me ("get a coolscan first, your lens is quite good already"). :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
(I say this in a friendly, across the bar, over a beer way)

If your lens was good enough, you would've bought the scanner and not had this question, right?

You can upgrade your scanner - you can't upgrade your negative (or slide or digital file for that matter). That lens will give a MUCH longer life and a better return on investment. As Maddoc said, any flaws in the lens will be magnified by a better scanner.

"Most of the time I want to scan for the web, but once in a while I'd like to have big prints like 20x30cm or so."

You already have enough for the web. For 20x30, you're really pushing a 35mm neg. Get a better lens to give you all that a 35mm can give. If you really want to go 20x30 (did you mean inches? 20x30cm is slightly more than 8x10 - my V300 can do that), do it right and send it off to be professionally scanned (or drum scanned).
 
Last edited:
Get the scanner. As good as they sometimes are, flatbed scanners are not sharp when scanning 35mm. Go for the film scanner and then maybe a used lens or two.
 
Jason808 said:
(I say this in a friendly, across the bar, over a beer way)

If your lens was good enough, you would've bought the scanner and not had this question, right?

You can upgrade your scanner - you can't upgrade your negative (or slide or digital file for that matter). That lens will give a MUCH longer life and a better return on investment. As Maddoc said, any flaws in the lens will be magnified by a better scanner.
Click to expand...

:) I did not want to drive this into a non-friendly corner, if you mean that with the "across the bar".

Yes, I think then a lens is the better way to upgrade, indeed.
 
Last edited:
Two crops from the same frame, taken with a Biogon 25mm f/2.8 lens on Superia S800:

109891336.jpg


There is a visible difference but not that much. The Nikon scan has slightly higher contrast and increased contrast lets an image appear sharper. ;)
 
I'd vote for the lens too. A better scanner can wait until you have more disposable income: the negs you take with a better lens will always be there to re-scan when you upgrade the scanner, but you can't go back in time to re-shoot moments with a better lens.

I also think a Biogon is a wonderful choice. The only down-side to it is its physical size: it's bigger than a Summicron, especially when you put on the hood. The CV 35/2.5 is a nice lens too, but I found it a bit harsher (contrast) and softer (in the corners) than the Biogon -- but really, I sold mine because it was too small and awkward to use with my stubby fingers. ;)
 
Right now you're looking for that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow! It's not there! If you need a really big print on occasion get the negative scanned and printed by a pro lab. Don't be in a big rush to sell off your old lenses even if you do buy some top of the line new ones. There will most likely be times when you'll WANT the look of that crummy old FSU lens. In the meantime Leica and Zeiss will keep on tempting you with still sharper more contrasty lenses, and other upscale companies are starting to market LTM lenses as well.
 
Florian, just something to think about...

A good but used Ultron 35/1.7 "plus" A used Nikon Coolscan V ED

will still be cheaper than:

A good used Biogon or 35 Summicron,

let alone brand new ones... ;)
 
Yep, I would also say lens first.

When you finally do get a better scanner, you can rescan all your old shots.

But if you get the scanner first, you can't reshoot all your old shots later with a new lens.
 
maddoc said:
Two crops from the same frame, taken with a Biogon 25mm f/2.8 lens on Superia S800:

109891336.jpg


There is a visible difference but not that much. The Nikon scan has slightly higher contrast and increased contrast lets an image appear sharper. ;)
Click to expand...

The Nikon scan has less noise, but is a multipass. I know Vuescan supports multipassing and that it does support the V500. But can the V500 do it?

My old Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II could do it with Vuescan, it helped a LOT. And boy did it take long :D Small wonder I totally and utterly wore it out.

As far as I know, the glass inserts keep the film flat and at the correct height for optimal sharpness. As I said, I didn't buy the V500 yet :D
 
For me, the answer is simple: better scanner. If you do not do wet printing and use scanning to digitize your film, the scanner is the crucial element of your workflow, at least as crucial as the enlarger, contrast filter, paper, and lens put together. With a bad scanner, you will not be able to take advantage of your Leica lens. On the other hand, a very good scanner (Coolscans are good enough), your FSU lenses will shine.
 
The lens first.

At least that's my case. Now that I had the two lenses that I wanted (a very good 35mm and a good vintage 50mm), I will go for a scanner.
 
I'd buy a film scanner since really good scanners maybe unavailable new in a few years or earlier, see here (german link). In my opinion even with the best flatbed scanners like the Epsons you won't get results as good as you can with a Nikon film scanner. If you want to archive your film *digitally* you should probably do it now. I have a similar problem, several thousand slides have to be archived digitally before they get unusable, some of them 20 years old.

A good german site is http://www.filmscanner.info/.
 
I bought a coolscan 4000 and it was the single most important purchase for my film photography. With it I can make photos take with a cheap point and shoot look better than when I scanned with the epson 4990 pictures from top lenses.
Remember that the scanner has also a lens and its quality matters!
 
Ronald_H said:
The Nikon scan has less noise, but is a multipass. I know Vuescan supports multipassing and that it does support the V500. But can the V500 do it?

My old Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II could do it with Vuescan, it helped a LOT. And boy did it take long :D Small wonder I totally and utterly wore it out.

As far as I know, the glass inserts keep the film flat and at the correct height for optimal sharpness. As I said, I didn't buy the V500 yet :D
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly I still have a copy of Vuescan on my computer that I use for scanning at home. I should check if multipass is supported by the V700 and if it improves something. :)
 
maddoc said:
If I remember correctly I still have a copy of Vuescan on my computer that I use for scanning at home. I should check if multipass is supported by the V700 and if it improves something. :)
Click to expand...

The V500 does multipass, and I think in contrast it brings a bit. But not much. I think the Coolscan would make sharper scans and more contrasty ones, too.

Now, there's still this kind of dilemma. But I thank you for the comments and suggestions so far. There's a Biogon in the classifieds which looks promising. Still a lot of money...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom