Bosk
Make photos, not war.
Hi guys,
I'm planning on purchasing a scanner of some kind during the next couple of weeks, for use exclusively with 35mm negatives, both B&W and colour.
I've done some research, and have narrowed it down to two possible choices: the Nikon Coolscan V ED for roughly AU$1000 or the Epson V700 for approx. AU$750.
Both these two seem to offer great quality scans for the price, and my budget restricts me from considering anything more expensive.
From what I've read the Nikon V will deliver better scans, but scan quality isn't my only priority.
The V700 seems a little more convenient in that I could scan 24 frames at once before re-loading, and I'm wondering how big a factor this would be if I want to scan multiple rolls at once. It also does other formats, but for me that's not too big a deal. Oh, and of course it's AU$250 cheaper!
So what I'm wondering is how difficult would the Nikon V ED be to load with negatives? Is putting a roll of 36 through it going to be a real chore compared with the V700?
I also know the quality will be superior, but I'm not sure by how much. Would I expect to see much more dynamic range from B&W negatives compared to the V700 for example?
I plan on doing regular A4 printing with an inkjet system of some kind, so I'm conscious of the fact that the quality of the prints I get will be largely influenced by the scanner I choose. If I only planned on scanning negs to post shots on the web I doubt I'd be worried about it so much.
Anyway I'd love to hear from anyone who owns one or both scanners or has had the chance to compare them.
It goes without saying that I'm very new to film & scanners in general having come from exclusive DSLR use, so I really appreciate your input, cheers.
I'm planning on purchasing a scanner of some kind during the next couple of weeks, for use exclusively with 35mm negatives, both B&W and colour.
I've done some research, and have narrowed it down to two possible choices: the Nikon Coolscan V ED for roughly AU$1000 or the Epson V700 for approx. AU$750.
Both these two seem to offer great quality scans for the price, and my budget restricts me from considering anything more expensive.
From what I've read the Nikon V will deliver better scans, but scan quality isn't my only priority.
The V700 seems a little more convenient in that I could scan 24 frames at once before re-loading, and I'm wondering how big a factor this would be if I want to scan multiple rolls at once. It also does other formats, but for me that's not too big a deal. Oh, and of course it's AU$250 cheaper!
So what I'm wondering is how difficult would the Nikon V ED be to load with negatives? Is putting a roll of 36 through it going to be a real chore compared with the V700?
I also know the quality will be superior, but I'm not sure by how much. Would I expect to see much more dynamic range from B&W negatives compared to the V700 for example?
I plan on doing regular A4 printing with an inkjet system of some kind, so I'm conscious of the fact that the quality of the prints I get will be largely influenced by the scanner I choose. If I only planned on scanning negs to post shots on the web I doubt I'd be worried about it so much.
Anyway I'd love to hear from anyone who owns one or both scanners or has had the chance to compare them.
It goes without saying that I'm very new to film & scanners in general having come from exclusive DSLR use, so I really appreciate your input, cheers.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
The V700 is a flatbed scanner.
It is great if you need to scan medium/large format, and/or reflective material too. But for 35mm film exclusively, i'd get a dedicated film scanner.
I have a V700 and while it's a great scanner, probably the best flatbed in this category out thereit is huge and heavy, it is a flatbed with a glass between the film and detector, which can get dirty/dusty, even inside, and the dynamic range is lower than for a film scanner. I'm not sure but i think the scan speed is less than with a film scanner.
But the biggest con is its size. It reall IS huge.
I wonder why you consider only the Nikon Coolscan V ED. There are more 35mm film scanners out there.
It is great if you need to scan medium/large format, and/or reflective material too. But for 35mm film exclusively, i'd get a dedicated film scanner.
I have a V700 and while it's a great scanner, probably the best flatbed in this category out thereit is huge and heavy, it is a flatbed with a glass between the film and detector, which can get dirty/dusty, even inside, and the dynamic range is lower than for a film scanner. I'm not sure but i think the scan speed is less than with a film scanner.
But the biggest con is its size. It reall IS huge.
I wonder why you consider only the Nikon Coolscan V ED. There are more 35mm film scanners out there.
jamiewakeham
Long time lurker
AP this week report that results from the V700 (and V750) are rather improved if you get the fluid mount attachment. It keeps the film flatter by essentially sticking it (via a couple of drops of fluid) to a flat piece of glass. You get this thing free if you buy a V750, and Epson have just announced they'll sell it for £95 to anyone with a V700.
I have a V700, and find myself wondering if it's* actually worth it. Or if I should have just got the V750 straight off.
35mm scans from the V700 are pretty damn good, though! I'll try to bring some on on Monday...
Jamie
* Edit - the fluid mount, not the scanner!
I have a V700, and find myself wondering if it's* actually worth it. Or if I should have just got the V750 straight off.
35mm scans from the V700 are pretty damn good, though! I'll try to bring some on on Monday...
Jamie
* Edit - the fluid mount, not the scanner!
Last edited:
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
I have added a few shots lately from 35mm scanned with the V700, they are here.
Edit: the fluid mount would be very useful for medium format film strips, where the original film holders are pretty sloppy. The film curls badly in them. The 35mm holder manages to keep the film flat enough, in my experience.
Edit: the fluid mount would be very useful for medium format film strips, where the original film holders are pretty sloppy. The film curls badly in them. The 35mm holder manages to keep the film flat enough, in my experience.
ffttklackdedeng
Registered User
Hi Bosk,
if you won't print bigger than A4 and don't want to scan slides, I think the V700 should be enough. I have a Coolscan V and am considering buying the V700 for (besides of scanning of larger negatives) exactly the same reasons as you: less hassle for smaller prints. The CS can cause a lot of single actions especially if the frame distances of your camera are not perfect
if you won't print bigger than A4 and don't want to scan slides, I think the V700 should be enough. I have a Coolscan V and am considering buying the V700 for (besides of scanning of larger negatives) exactly the same reasons as you: less hassle for smaller prints. The CS can cause a lot of single actions especially if the frame distances of your camera are not perfect
eddie con
Established
the v700 is indeed huge and heavy and consumes a lot of workspace. there are other minor "faults". there are two locks that are not so prominently placed that protect it during transport. they are to be unlocked prior to operation. and while doing multi-tasking on the computer while scanning, the v700 does not give a clear signal when it has finished scanning all your negatives. i concur with the problem of dust that can easily settle on the glasses. i always keep a lens cleaner and blower nearby. it is also a little noisy -- whirring and whooshing and purring -- and may disturb people who value silence. lastly, the frames used to keep the film in place works well but is rather rickety. i would want some assurance that it would be easy to have them replaced. but in spite of all these, i am keeping the v700 because the images it produces are just great.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
You can get a used Agfa Duoscan T2500. That's a fast SCSI flatbed scanner that supports an extra glassless negative scanner and 5000x5000 dpi physical resolution. Over here they cost around 150 EUR used since Agfa went broke. Hard to beat.
Tim Gray
Well-known
How is the V700 at scanning 3 strips of 35mm? Can it reliably batch that many at once?
I'm close to pulling the trigger on a Coolscan V myself. I'd love to have the ability to do (most of) a roll at once, but really can't spend the $1000+ required for the CS 5000 + roll feeder. To be honest, the V700 is probably fine for my pictures.
For my $500-600 though, I do want good quality with a relatively efficient workflow. Could the V700 provide that? Is the Coolscan a hassle to work with in a semi batch mode?
I'm close to pulling the trigger on a Coolscan V myself. I'd love to have the ability to do (most of) a roll at once, but really can't spend the $1000+ required for the CS 5000 + roll feeder. To be honest, the V700 is probably fine for my pictures.
For my $500-600 though, I do want good quality with a relatively efficient workflow. Could the V700 provide that? Is the Coolscan a hassle to work with in a semi batch mode?
amateriat
We're all light!
From a standpoint of pure quality, the Nikon wins out. However:
- if you don't plan on making prints larger than A4/Letter size, as you state, the qualitative difference may be somewhat moot. Of course, you could change your mind about maximum print size at some point (one glance at the current range of A3+ printers on the market might be enlightening).
- one potential advantage of the flatbed option is being able to create digital contact sheets: lay down an entire roll, cut into strips, scan the whole lot in one pass, then print. IMO, this works ideally if you can print beyond A4/Letter size in order to evaluate the contact sheet without a loupe...which gets us back to those A3+ printers. ;-)
As far as scanning a batch of negs in one "go", the flatbed seems the easier path on-paper, but there's the matter of keeping the platen clean in addition to keeping the film clean (the latter sometimes being at cross purposes with the former, depending on conditions). With my film scanner (Minolta 5400), I simply went out and bought several additional sets of film holders (film strip and slide) so that when I scan in batch mode, the scanner simply churns through one film-holder's worth while I load another; as soon as the scanner is done, it ejects the film holder, I pull that holder out and put another one in and with one mouse-click the process repeats. Quick and lagely fuss-free, and likely something you can do with the Nikon (at least with film strips; don't know about slides).
Hope this helps a bit.
- Barrett
- if you don't plan on making prints larger than A4/Letter size, as you state, the qualitative difference may be somewhat moot. Of course, you could change your mind about maximum print size at some point (one glance at the current range of A3+ printers on the market might be enlightening).
- one potential advantage of the flatbed option is being able to create digital contact sheets: lay down an entire roll, cut into strips, scan the whole lot in one pass, then print. IMO, this works ideally if you can print beyond A4/Letter size in order to evaluate the contact sheet without a loupe...which gets us back to those A3+ printers. ;-)
As far as scanning a batch of negs in one "go", the flatbed seems the easier path on-paper, but there's the matter of keeping the platen clean in addition to keeping the film clean (the latter sometimes being at cross purposes with the former, depending on conditions). With my film scanner (Minolta 5400), I simply went out and bought several additional sets of film holders (film strip and slide) so that when I scan in batch mode, the scanner simply churns through one film-holder's worth while I load another; as soon as the scanner is done, it ejects the film holder, I pull that holder out and put another one in and with one mouse-click the process repeats. Quick and lagely fuss-free, and likely something you can do with the Nikon (at least with film strips; don't know about slides).
Hope this helps a bit.
- Barrett
ghost
Well-known
the way i look at, flatbeds are a short term solution for 35mm and medium format, while film scanners are long term. flatbeds may be a long term solution for large format.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Sounds good. I was leaning towards the Nikon anyway, but I was curious about the batch capabilities of the V700. It also looks like I'll have plenty of time to save for a Nikon before one is actually in stock somewhere.
jamiewakeham
Long time lurker
My V700 is currently on loan to a friend, who's batch scanning many years worth of negs. It's a great deal - I don't have to find any desk space for the damn thing, and I get all my personal scanning done for me on demand, with a 24-hour turnaround! Anyway, he's merrily loading it up with 35mm film strips and just leaving it to do its thing with no problems at all. You do want to leave it for some time, though...
Jamie
Jamie
goo0h
Well-known
Anybody have any examples of scanning some high ISO (like say 1600) B&W film with the Coolscan V?
kully
Happy Snapper
Remember to compare the scanning times as well - the v700 may scan 24 frames in one go but looking at the AP review the scanning times are much longer than the Nikon V - you'll be annoyed waiting around for it to finish before you put the next 24 in.
I had considered a flatbed to complement the Nikon V I have, but I realised
a) I can browse the web while I scan
b) I don't need to scan in every frame
d) My previous flatbed had super dust problems.
c) IQ is better (I don't normally care for pixel peeping, but the difference is huge)
Having said that, I _hate_ my scanner everytime I have to scan something in with it - it is such a waste of time. I wish I could pay someone to do it for me (I know I could, but I'm a tight ghet).
I had considered a flatbed to complement the Nikon V I have, but I realised
a) I can browse the web while I scan
b) I don't need to scan in every frame
d) My previous flatbed had super dust problems.
c) IQ is better (I don't normally care for pixel peeping, but the difference is huge)
Having said that, I _hate_ my scanner everytime I have to scan something in with it - it is such a waste of time. I wish I could pay someone to do it for me (I know I could, but I'm a tight ghet).
Bosk
Make photos, not war.
Thanks so much for the replies everyone.
It sounds as if either scanner would satisfy me.
I'm still curious though, how difficult is it to load the Coolscan V ED with film? If scanning an entire roll of 36 with the Nikon is going to be much more work than with the V700 then that would be the deciding factor for me.
Also, does either one of the scanners do better with B&W negatives than the other? I'm anticipating that much of my work will be in B&W so this is something I have uppermost in my mind.
Thanks again.
It sounds as if either scanner would satisfy me.
I'm still curious though, how difficult is it to load the Coolscan V ED with film? If scanning an entire roll of 36 with the Nikon is going to be much more work than with the V700 then that would be the deciding factor for me.
Also, does either one of the scanners do better with B&W negatives than the other? I'm anticipating that much of my work will be in B&W so this is something I have uppermost in my mind.
Thanks again.
chrish
Chris H
I have the Coolscan V and I love it. I used the 4000 when I was in school and was already used to the nikon setup so I just went with it. I have no problems loading film or scanning a whole roll with it, i just read RFF or something while it scans.
I usually batch scan all my images at a preset for cropping the image at 1024 px and saving it as a jpeg, then I throw the pics in iPhoto as a storage bin and if i ever want a better quality scan i just re-scan it. I keep all my negs in notebooks and save the images according to the page-row-and frame so it makes it a lot easier to find pictures later.
My only gripes for the V are that you cant do multi-pass scanning with it, something the 5000 is capable of. Basically what it does is scan the image up to 8 times i think and uses the data to get rid of digital noise. Its crap that that feature isnt on the V because it seems like a software feature and not really a feature of the scanner. The other thing is that you have to have your negatives in a strip of 3-6, no more no less. Thats fine if you cut them yourself, but if you drop your photos off at walmart and tell them not to cut your negatives and they cut them anyways and one frame is left by its lonesome you need to use the not included film adapter for the slide reader or put it in a slide holder and scan it that way.
the digital ice feature works great with color film for removing dust and scratches. not so much for b&w since it thinks the silver is dust. but since you cant use it with b&w images it cuts down on scanning time.
i have samples on my flickr site, the most recent being hp5 shot at 400 and developed in tmax dev. theres a roll of delta 3200 shot and developed at 1600 but it was developed at a store and it is way grainy. i have a roll of hp5 going at 1600 now to see the results of that.
ill be happy to answer any questions or provide any samples!
I usually batch scan all my images at a preset for cropping the image at 1024 px and saving it as a jpeg, then I throw the pics in iPhoto as a storage bin and if i ever want a better quality scan i just re-scan it. I keep all my negs in notebooks and save the images according to the page-row-and frame so it makes it a lot easier to find pictures later.
My only gripes for the V are that you cant do multi-pass scanning with it, something the 5000 is capable of. Basically what it does is scan the image up to 8 times i think and uses the data to get rid of digital noise. Its crap that that feature isnt on the V because it seems like a software feature and not really a feature of the scanner. The other thing is that you have to have your negatives in a strip of 3-6, no more no less. Thats fine if you cut them yourself, but if you drop your photos off at walmart and tell them not to cut your negatives and they cut them anyways and one frame is left by its lonesome you need to use the not included film adapter for the slide reader or put it in a slide holder and scan it that way.
the digital ice feature works great with color film for removing dust and scratches. not so much for b&w since it thinks the silver is dust. but since you cant use it with b&w images it cuts down on scanning time.
i have samples on my flickr site, the most recent being hp5 shot at 400 and developed in tmax dev. theres a roll of delta 3200 shot and developed at 1600 but it was developed at a store and it is way grainy. i have a roll of hp5 going at 1600 now to see the results of that.
ill be happy to answer any questions or provide any samples!
S
shaaktiman
Guest
I don't know if my similar experience is going to help, but I figured I'd share.
Last year I bought an Epson 4990, (the generation before the v700) hoping to use it for everything. While it is great for medium and large format, once I rediscovered 35mm I found it lacking in sharpness and detail. So I went out and bought a Dimage ScanDual IV only to find that the Epson was BETTER than the inexpensive dedicated film scanner. Especially in terms of tonality. And the v700 is supposedly quite a bit better than the 4990.
That said, finding that the dimage was suckier than my 4990 didn't make me any happier with the scans I was getting so I bought a supercoolscan 5000. WOW! The Nikon blows the 4990 out of the water in every category. (And I spent a LOT of time with the Epson and feel pretty confident that I can coax the best scans it is capable of from it.)
While the 2 scanners that you are considering are undoubtedly going to be closer to each other in quality, the Nikon V is probably not much different in quality than my 5000. I can't imagine that the v700 will be able to compare when it comes to 35mm. Its advantage is versatility, not ultimate quality or productivity. My Nikon is very fast with cut film, incidentally, but the real time savings is in the loading of the strips. Getting the strips into the Epson holders and making sure they are flat (which they never truly are) is a pain. The Nikon makes it easier in that respect.
One other consideration may be that you will probably have an easier time selling the Nikon (if you find you need to for some reason.) The market for used dedicated film scanners is small and there are always a few people willing to save a few $$. While it doesn't look like there are going to be many new models of dedicated 35mm scanners, flatbeds will probably be made for awhile. It may hold its value better than the flatbed. For example, my dimage was purchased for $180 new, by the time I decided I didn't like it and it had stopped being produced (2 months later) I saw them going for $250 and up on ebay.
If you like I can show you a comparison scan for B/W between the 2 similar scanners I have. It might give you some idea of the potential differences. (I am not kidding, it is a HUGE difference.)
Last year I bought an Epson 4990, (the generation before the v700) hoping to use it for everything. While it is great for medium and large format, once I rediscovered 35mm I found it lacking in sharpness and detail. So I went out and bought a Dimage ScanDual IV only to find that the Epson was BETTER than the inexpensive dedicated film scanner. Especially in terms of tonality. And the v700 is supposedly quite a bit better than the 4990.
That said, finding that the dimage was suckier than my 4990 didn't make me any happier with the scans I was getting so I bought a supercoolscan 5000. WOW! The Nikon blows the 4990 out of the water in every category. (And I spent a LOT of time with the Epson and feel pretty confident that I can coax the best scans it is capable of from it.)
While the 2 scanners that you are considering are undoubtedly going to be closer to each other in quality, the Nikon V is probably not much different in quality than my 5000. I can't imagine that the v700 will be able to compare when it comes to 35mm. Its advantage is versatility, not ultimate quality or productivity. My Nikon is very fast with cut film, incidentally, but the real time savings is in the loading of the strips. Getting the strips into the Epson holders and making sure they are flat (which they never truly are) is a pain. The Nikon makes it easier in that respect.
One other consideration may be that you will probably have an easier time selling the Nikon (if you find you need to for some reason.) The market for used dedicated film scanners is small and there are always a few people willing to save a few $$. While it doesn't look like there are going to be many new models of dedicated 35mm scanners, flatbeds will probably be made for awhile. It may hold its value better than the flatbed. For example, my dimage was purchased for $180 new, by the time I decided I didn't like it and it had stopped being produced (2 months later) I saw them going for $250 and up on ebay.
If you like I can show you a comparison scan for B/W between the 2 similar scanners I have. It might give you some idea of the potential differences. (I am not kidding, it is a HUGE difference.)