Scanner for M7 Negs - What Do You Use?

[duality]

I posted a while ago about scanners for neg scanning. I'm still using a Canon LiDE flatbed scanner, but it's so slow to scan a roll of negs in it's costing me so much time. The resolution isn't all that I'd like either.

I'm currently looking at the Epson Perfection V750 Pro and the Super Coolscan 5000 ED. I'd like a pro-quality, dedicated, high-resolution, fast neg/tran/slide scanner and don't need a flatbed scanner really.

I just wondered if anyone used these scanners, or could suggest another? I also use a Macbook Pro and Mac OS X 10.4, so it'd have to be compatibile with that. I need really good quality, high res scans to import into my Aperture workflow, and then be able to get good-sized lambda/lightjet prints from them. I really only have b/w negs and colour transparencies, but I also have a lot of slides to scan too.

Thanks in advance (^ ^)

 

[Nachkebia]

I use Coolscan 5000 ED, I like it but I don`t think it is pro-quality scanner, I mean if you want to print A3 from 35mm negative it will be very dificult

 

[DMG]

I use an epson 4990, but I only scan for reference not for print. Any printing from negs would either be by a pro lab or darkroom. I use a combination of Mac Book and a G4 (so that's 10.3 and 10.4) the scanner works good with both, when I'm scanning I'm usually making sure I've got something else to do at the same time though. How do you find Aperture? I used Lightroom and Aperture for a while then got sick of it, all these workflow tools don't seem to work for me.

 

[duality]

I really like Aperture. My workflow beforehand consisted of Adobe Bridge and Photoshop, but Bridge - to be fair - is awful for managing images to any reasonable degree. It's a decent enough browser, but just not up to managing a lot of images and edits. I ended up creating my own contrived system for managing images.

Aperture is a bit of a shift from lots of other methods, but when I got into it it's really great. I love its way of working now. It's worth following the training and getting into the mindset, because in my experience; when it clicks, you realise how good it is. I generally leave images on an external drive rather than a copy on my Macbook and a vault on the external drive. When I'm working with a project currently (until I have selects and stacks etc, and stuff is submitted) I have the masters on my Macbook, but then I relocate the originals to the external drive and save space on my machine.

I guess I want a really good, high-quality scanner, but I don't want to have to mess around too much re-loading negs into a holder etc. The flatbed I have at the moment has a 35mm attachment which the negs fit under, and a light puck sits on top. After each scan I have to move the light along one frame, and after every 6 scans I need to re-position the neg/tran strip, which is a right pain. I don't mind if it takes a while to scan, just that I don't have to mess around with this kind of system.

Actually, with work, most of my images are taken on a Canon 1Ds Mk2, so I just import them into an Aperture project after a shoot. I would like to do the same with high-res scans of my 35mm negs / trans. I don't - however - wish to spend a rediculous amount of money in the lab. I don't mind getting the lab to scan negs for very large prints. In fact, if I get lambda / lightjet prints done, I get everything done in the lab.

 

[boilerdoc2]

I use the Coolscan and it will do batch slides and 12 negatives at a time. The 5000 is faster than the 4000 and the quality is great. Can make 13X19 prints easily at 4000dpi. scan. The high end Epson V750 is supposed to be good, but not quite as good as a dedicated film scanner. More convenient though.
What about using the Canon camera and a slide copier set up? Copy your slides that way.
Steve

 

[peter_n]

I use a Konica-Minolta Scan Dual IV but I wouldn't necessarily recommend it as they're no longer made. But if all you want to do is scan B&W for the web they are fine.

 

[swoop]

I use a canon 9950F. It does a great job. I typically scan at around 12MP. My ex had a Nikon Coolscan 9000. And it did an amazing job. You could see the silver crystals in the film before the scanner quality degraded.

 

[ghost]

coolscan ftw.

 

[shenkerian]

I agree about the Coolscan, but has anyone heard about the new HP Scanjets shown (I believe) at PhotoPlus? I'm skeptical because they're flatbeds, but the people who saw results at the show swore they were magical. I'll try to find the discussion I was reading about them.

 

[shenkerian]

Here's some discussion on the new HPs (4050, 4010, 8300) due at the start of next year:
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/BB/viewtopic.php?t=2453

And also a Microtek (M1):
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1161706453.html

Has anyone heard anything else about these? Except for the 8300, their price points are all under the Coolscan 5000.

 

[duality]

I've decided to go for the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED - thanks! (^ ^)b

 

[like2fiddle]

before you all go away...

before you all go away...

How about a recommendation for an entry-level, basic negative scanner to use mainly for replacing contact sheet printing and web posting.

Thanks,

Roger

 

[MikeL]

My 2 bits, I have both. I've been using the Nikon Coolscan but I'm starting to use medium format and need a flat bed. I'm still in the tweaking stage (i.e. learning) on the v750, but from what I've seen, the v750 and Nikon 5000 are very close. At 100% and on 8x10 prints there's no difference (could be limited user knowledge). The v750's have slightly less detail when they come out, but not a big deal to me (not a sharpness freak). Unsharp mask can bring detail to similar levels as the 5000 but at the expense of more grain. I haven't had time to tweak more with Neat Image and compare both results, but if I'm going to spend a lot of time tweaking I'd probably have the ones I like scanned professionally.

Colorwise there are differences when on auto, and I'm going to eventually get some calibration tools. The v750 came with MonacoEZ color. (Possible hijacking) Does anyone have monitor/scanner/printer calibration tools they recommend?

 

[Socke]

A friend of mine used a high end flatbed, Canon 9950, for her 6x4.5 negs but borrowed my Canon FS2710 for her 24x36 negs because the flatbed was not good enough in her eyes. She studied art and although she didn't major in photography she had quite high expectations.

And since you mention M7 negatives, if a flatbed, even one of the best, is not good enough for a Canon EOS 300 with Voigtländer Zooms, you won't have much fun with one of those and your Leica glass.

A scanner is a big eqaulizer and if you use extreme fine grain film with highest resolution lenses you need the best scanner you can get the most out of your negatives.

So I'd like to recomend one of the cheaper Imacon scanners 🙂, a drum scaner would be better. While scanner resolution is an arithmetric series, scanner price is exponential.

The Super Coolscan 5000 seems to be the best compromise between price and resolution if you need the ability to scan complete rolls and connect it through firewire. If you want to scan framed slides or film strips and USB2 is good enough for you, then the cheaper Coolscan V may be as good as its bigger brother. In some tests it resolved some 3950 ppi instead of the specified 4000 and you need to order the FH-3 filmholder seperatly.

 

[RayPA]

How about a recommendation for an entry-level, basic negative scanner to use mainly for replacing contact sheet printing and web posting.

Thanks,

Roger

You'd probably be better off posting this in a separate thread, but an Epson flatbed print/negative scanner is a good way to get up and running on web posting. They're cheap(er), and the ability to scan (and preview) two strips of six at one time is something I really miss since going the dedicated film scanner route.


.

 

[like2fiddle]

Thanks Ray, I'll look into the Epson flatbeds and start a new thread if I don't find what I'm looking for.

Roger

 

[MikeL]

The Super Coolscan 5000 seems to be the best compromise between price and resolution if you need the ability to scan complete rolls and connect it through firewire.

If you need firewire, you'll have to get the 4000 or 9000. The 5000 only has USB 2.0. I have a suped up G4 cube that doesn't have USB 2.0, and it's a bit slow with the 5000. The Epson is nice since it has both.

 

[Harry Lime]

I have the NIkon 5000ED and just recently got the 9000ED, running off a MacBook Pro (Core2Duo). The 5000 series is strictly 35mm and smaller, whereas the 9000 will handle negs up to 6x9 . The difference between the 5000 and 5000ED is that the ED unit is 16bit and the regular 5000 12-bit.

If you are after a professional quality scan, forget about flatbed scanners. You'll need a dedicated film scanner. I sometimes use a cheap Canon flatbed to make quick contact sheet scans of my negs, but thats about it.

In my opinion the current Nikon scanners are the best units this side of an IMACON. The Imacon is great, but costs as much as a small car. In any case the quality of the scans from the Nikon are superb and professional quality.

One nice features of the Nikon scanners is that they use an LED light-source, instead of the traditional fluorescent tubes found in most units. LED lights have an extremely long life-span (100,000 hours usually), are very stable and run cool.

So far, image quality for 35mm scans appears to be identical for both units. I've made some 16x20 Lightjet prints from scans coming out of the 5000ED and they are terrific. The 9000 appears to be faster (Firewire vs USB2 on the 5000ED).

If you get the 5000ED buy the FH-3 filmholder ($20-30), which will keep your negs flatter and give you sharper corners. If you get the 9000 series budget for the FH-869GR ($280) glass holder. It's almost pointless to buy the 9000 without the glass holder. You will never be able to get a super sharp scan, without perfectly flat negs.

The quality of your scans will very much depend on how well you use Nikonscan.

99% of my work is black and white and I've found that setting the negative to color and output to 16-bit grayscale gives better results than telling the scanner that you are feeding it b/w negs. The DEE mode can really dig details out of the shadows and highlights. But you'll figure all of this out as you experiment.

Another unit worth looking at is the ArtixScan 120tf, which scan negs up to 6x9. A friend of mine has one of these and it produces very nice results, but I prefer the Nikon units.

 

[MikeL]

I'm in no way affiliated with Epson, so I don't want to sound like an salesperson, but with the Epson v700-750 you can scan 4 6-image 35mm strips at a time.