Some Qs about Nikon Coolscan 8000 ED

[brbo]

I've now had CS8000 at home for testing with the option to buy so I could compare all three scanners (nothing scientific, just my usual scenarios).

Minolta 5400: I knew it was good, but now I can see that Nikon 8000 can't touch it in resolution department (and Minolta, though slow, is still faster than Nikon at comparable settings in Vuescan). I don't have lenses, mostly don't use tripod with 35mm format, don't print big enough to really use the potential this scanner has.

Microtek 120tf: I wish it would work with Vuescan (no problems with Silverfast or Scanwizard) and have ICE (I shoot colour film almost exclusively). If it had ICE it would be a perfect all-in-one scanner for me. Same nominal (and effective) resolution as Coolscan 8000. This is probably a MF scanner with best price/performance (especially if you mostly do BW).

Nikon CS 8000: Slow. Works with Vuescan (so as long as computer has firewire there is no problem with computer/software updates) and has ICE. Option to load 2 strips of 6 35mm frames is very nice. Has light bleeding from sprocket holes.

For the price, I thought Nikon 8000 would do it all, but unfortunately it's not perfect. But, I don't have any ultra sharp lenses in 35mm so 4000dpi is still plenty and Nikon has ICE. If I can negotiate a good price I might still buy Nikon and sell Minolta and Microtek. I just hope I won't regret it... Btw, anyone bought a Nikon 8000 lately and would share the buying price with me? eBay prices seem to be 1k EUR and up.

 

[edge100]

I've now had CS8000 at home for testing with the option to buy so I could compare all three scanners (nothing scientific, just my usual scenarios).

Minolta 5400: I knew it was good, but now I can see that Nikon 8000 can't touch it in resolution department (and Minolta, though slow, is still faster than Nikon at comparable settings in Vuescan). I don't have lenses, mostly don't use tripod with 35mm format, don't print big enough to really use the potential this scanner has.

Microtek 120tf: I wish it would work with Vuescan (no problems with Silverfast or Scanwizard) and have ICE (I shoot colour film almost exclusively). If it had ICE it would be a perfect all-in-one scanner for me. Same nominal (and effective) resolution as Coolscan 8000. This is probably a MF scanner with best price/performance (especially if you mostly do BW).

Nikon CS 8000: Slow. Works with Vuescan (so as long as computer has firewire there is no problem with computer/software updates) and has ICE. Option to load 2 strips of 6 35mm frames is very nice. Has light bleeding from sprocket holes.

For the price, I thought Nikon 8000 would do it all, but unfortunately it's not perfect. But, I don't have any ultra sharp lenses in 35mm so 4000dpi is still plenty and Nikon has ICE. If I can negotiate a good price I might still buy Nikon and sell Minolta and Microtek. I just hope I won't regret it... Btw, anyone bought a Nikon 8000 lately and would share the buying price with me? eBay prices seem to be 1k EUR and up.

Perhaps I missed something, but the Microtek 120tf should work with Vuescan (I have the Polaroid SprintScan 120, which is the same hardware, and it works just fine with Vuescan, and I know at least one other person with the 120tf who uses Vuescan).

 

[brbo]

Perhaps I missed something, but the Microtek 120tf should work with Vuescan (I have the Polaroid SprintScan 120, which is the same hardware, and it works just fine with Vuescan, and I know at least one other person with the 120tf who uses Vuescan).

Banding problem in Vuescan (like demonstrated here). No such problems in Scanwizard or Silverfast.

 

[Peter_S]

Instead of starting a new tread, I want to add a question: For 120 film the glass holder seems almost mandatory (opposed to the stock FH-869S, correct? Those would drive up the price quite a bit...

 

[brbo]

Instead of starting a new tread, I want to add a question: For 120 film the glass holder seems almost mandatory (opposed to the stock FH-869S, correct? Those would drive up the price quite a bit...

I bought a Coolscan 8000 (an offer I couldn't refuse - anyone looking to buy Microtek 120tf or Minolta 5400 v1?) and I plan to buy glass inserts for FH-869S holder from Focal Point. FH-869G(R) holders are ridiculously priced.

Btw, I don't think FH-869S is totally useless. Though, I've only done a couple of 120 scans so far.

 

[Denverdad]

There are those who have made the FH-869S holder to work for them, for example, Dante Stella has a good writeup on this holder. If you could solve the issue of the little bit of curl you get at each end of the strip (or just ignore it), and if none of your film is wavy in the opposite direction to which the tension is applied, then this might end up being all you need. For me that didn't quite work and I spent a ridiculously LONG time trying to find solution in the complete opposite direction, finally settling on a sandwich approach with two sheets of AN glass from Focal Point.

Regarding:

e) Is there any way to scan into the unexposed edge of 120 film on Nikon 8000? My Microtek 120tf can get just a mm or two into the edge, I wish it could scan the whole width of the film.

Technically, the Nikon 8000/9000 has the ability to scan a swath that wide, but none of the holders fully accommodate it. The maximum scan width (63.481mm) is only activated with the rotating glass holder, and neither it nor any of the other holders has an opening that is wide enough. Having said that, if it is important enough to you it is actually possible to build or modify a holder to achieve the "full" 120 scan. I know this because I modified one of the standard holders to allow me to scan old 116 film, which is wider than 120. Although I have never been too interested in scanning out to the edges of a 120 strip, your question suddenly made me realize that I could actually do that now if I wanted. 🙂

 

[Peter_S]

So...I got a Coolscan 8000 but had to realize that it has firewire :bang:...my laptop (Asus UX31A) does not, and neither does it have eSATA, PCMCIA or ExpressCard slots. From all I understand, I will not be able to make the scanner work with my laptop, or am I wrong?

I run Ubuntu/Windows 7 dual-boot, should that matter.

 

[pixelated]

Probably not, unless there is some sort of firewire to USB converter, I don't know of one though. Even then the software might not recognize the scanner is there without a direct firewire connection.
The Nikon software doesn't run on win 7 anyway though (so I understand), so you may want to shop for something a little older on the used market running XP or MacOS from a couple or so versions back for driving it.
Most Macs will have firewire built-in, or if you want a PC, look for one that either has it built-in or get a card. Either way, you could dual-boot with linux if you like.

 

[Peter_S]

Probably not, unless there is some sort of firewire to USB converter, I don't know of one though. Even then the software might not recognize the scanner is there without a direct firewire connection.
The Nikon software doesn't run on win 7 anyway though (so I understand), so you may want to shop for something a little older on the used market running XP or MacOS from a couple or so versions back for driving it.
Most Macs will have firewire built-in, or if you want a PC, look for one that either has it built-in or get a card. Either way, you could dual-boot with linux if you like.

Thanks! This does not sound good. I would really like the scanner to run on my ASUS, as the screen is superb. Oh, wait - my old Sony Vaio TX-850p has EEEP-1394 4-pin and PCMCIA (and a pretty good screen, too). That may work just fine. I could set that up again with Windows XP (or dual-boot).

 

[Fernando2]

my old Sony Vaio TX-850p has EEEP-1394 4-pin and PCMCIA (and a pretty good screen, too). That may work just fine. I could set that up again with Windows XP (or dual-boot).

If you don't want to revert to XP, you could invest in Vuescan Professional: works like a charm with the 8000 (I have it), better than NikonScan, under Windows 7 32 or 64.

Fernando

 

[sevo]

The software works under win7 (or indeed 8 as well), but its driver and installer do not. There are fudged ini files out on the net that permit installing it on top of a generic driver. I haven't had any issues with it when installed that way.

Older computers with Firewire port are cheap, and can be run with any outdated OS you should not trust on the main Internet connected computer, so I would use that rather than some fragile adapter.

 

[shawn]

"I bought a Coolscan 8000 (an offer I couldn't refuse - anyone looking to buy Microtek 120tf or Minolta 5400 v1?) and I plan to buy glass inserts for FH-869S holder from Focal Point."

The holders for 35mm are very nice as well. Helps keep the edges sharp. If you get 35mm inserts have them made Have focal point make them 10"s long instead of their typical size. Makes it easier to align them and you can also tape the edges together if you have very curly negatives.

Shawn

 

[shawn]

" Or, better: it suffers from internal parassite reflections which show up as "light leaks", or flare (they improved the lens coating in the 9000)."

When I opened up my 8000 to clean the front surface mirror I added adhesive felt in the light tunnel to help soak up reflections within the unit. Not sure if it helped but it certainly didn't hurt.

Shawn

 

[shawn]

" but now I can see that Nikon 8000 can't touch it in resolution department"

You might want to try cleaning your front surface mirror in the 8000. When I bought my 8000 it had a fair amount of haze on the mirror. That hurt resolution.

Shawn

 

[brbo]

Thanks, shawn!

I don't think that my Nikon 8000 is too dirty or not performing ok. I also have Microtek 120tf (4000dpi) and when compared to Minolta 5400 the resolution difference was quite noticeable and I thought that maybe Microtek 120tf was not quite 4000dpi in actual resolution. Now, I see that with Nikon 8000 the Minolta's edge is still very evident. Doesn't matter anyway since I sold Minolta as I really don't need 5400dpi.

But I agree that having a look and cleaning probably won't hurt. It would be great if the internal reflections could be reduced since Microtek 120tf is much much better in this regard (and much faster too, but I hope I can live with that since Nikon has ICE and Microtek doesn't).

I think that FH-835S is very good and for the moment I don't plan to buy ANR glass inserts for it. I hope to be able to scan 135 panoramic format in FH-869S with glass inserts, this should be possible, right?

 

[shawn]

"I think that FH-835S is very good and for the moment I don't plan to buy ANR glass inserts for it."

They work pretty well but you can get fuzzy edges of frames if the film isn't completely flat from the little tabs at each frame holding it down.

"I hope to be able to scan 135 panoramic format in FH-869S with glass inserts, this should be possible, right?"

Yes, as long as you aren't wider than 9cm. MF 6x9 is as wide as the 8000 can go in a single scan. You will likely need glass inserts and maybe a mask made out of construction paper for the 35mm panoramic film. After that you will just need to set the crop as needed and run with it. Do this you can scan most anything within the limit of 9cm. If I start shooting my Minox again I am planning on scanning it this way. That is using Vuescan, I think you could do the same in NikonScan.

Good instruction on cleaning the 8000 at:
http://www.marginalsoftware.com/LS8000Notes/cleaning_the_optics_of_the_ls.htm

Pretty easy to do.

Shawn

 

[brbo]

Thanks again shawn!

Do you have any experience with Focal Point ANR glass inserts for FH-869S? They have kit of a clear thin bottom glass insert plus a thicker ANR upper glass insert. I ordered glass holder from them for my Microtek 120tf and I found out that I really need ANR glass on the bottom, too. Most of my film produces Newton rings even on the emulsion side when put on clear glass. So, I'm planning to order and use ANR even for bottom glass. I hope AF in Nikon 8000 doesn't have a problem in such configuration...

 

[shawn]

Yes, I use the Focalpoint kit for the 869S with the thin glass on the bottom, same with the 35mm holders. I hadn't noticed Newton rings but looking at a recent 4000 dpi 6x9 scan at 100% I can see a little bit of newton ring interference. Looks like it is centered around something on the negative, I didn't clean them well enough. Look at top left here:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5543/13977877375_34592cc5b9_o.jpg

I had ICE turned off on that scan.

Wouldn't ANR on the bottom hurt resolution?

Shawn

 

[brbo]

Yes, I use the Focalpoint kit for the 869S with the thin glass on the bottom, same with the 35mm holders. I hadn't noticed Newton rings but looking at a recent 4000 dpi 6x9 scan at 100% I can see a little bit of newton ring interference. Looks like it is centered around something on the negative, I didn't clean them well enough. Look at top left here:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5543/13977877375_34592cc5b9_o.jpg

I had ICE turned off on that scan.

Wouldn't ANR on the bottom hurt resolution?

I use ANR glass sandwich (thin on bottom and thicker/heavier on top) on Microtek 120tf and impact on resolution is insignificant, but since light source on Nikon 8000 is different it might pose a problem?! I don't know...

 

[Denverdad]

I use ANR glass sandwich (thin on bottom and thicker/heavier on top) on Microtek 120tf and impact on resolution is insignificant, but since light source on Nikon 8000 is different it might pose a problem?! I don't know...

I use the exact same sandwich approach (1mm AN glass on bottom, 3mm on top) with the medium format holder on my Nikon 9000 and have no problems. I tested this configuration first and found no resolution loss ...and I am a certified pixel peeper!