ronnies
Well-known
Very happy with my Nikon Coolscan IV ED.
Ronnie
Ronnie
craygc
Well-known
Nikon 4000ED for 135 & Nikon 9000ED for MF...
Paddy C
Unused film collector
Newly acquired V700 which is making me very happy when scanning MF. And grumpy when scanning 35mm.
I'm going to try some more tests to see if I can coax something better out of the 35mm scans. If I can't, I'm shopping for a dedicated scanner for 35mm.
I'm going to try some more tests to see if I can coax something better out of the 35mm scans. If I can't, I'm shopping for a dedicated scanner for 35mm.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
i found that i'm usually limited by the film itself, not the resolving power of the v700.
Except when we talk seeing through the shadows on a contrasty slide film.
Except when we talk seeing through the shadows on a contrasty slide film.
rya
Established
Coolscan 4000. Learning how to be gentle with the software really helped.
I have often wished that I had gotten either a flatbed or 9000--something for MF--because now I only shoot 135 to accommodate my scanner.
I have often wished that I had gotten either a flatbed or 9000--something for MF--because now I only shoot 135 to accommodate my scanner.
Svitantti
Well-known
I think V700 has pretty good dynamic range. At least compared to Scan Dual IV... Maybe Nikons have even better.
As always in these discussions, I'd like to point out that most people want also the properties of the film preserved as well as possible - not just what the lens draws (which is usually not that much, especially handheld).
As always in these discussions, I'd like to point out that most people want also the properties of the film preserved as well as possible - not just what the lens draws (which is usually not that much, especially handheld).
platorulez
Member
I use the V700. Never seen the output from a dedicated film scanner, but it's miles ahead of my old Canoscan 9900f. Not sure if it's my technique, the film I shoot or the scanner, but I've never had good results with my colour scans, they always seem to have weird colour shifts that I can't get rid of easily, even with manual colour balancing. Mostly the scans have way too much magenta or purple, and my blues usually scan as purple and I have to do a hue adjustment in photoshop.
But the detail and sharpness compared to my previous scanner is fantastic.
But the detail and sharpness compared to my previous scanner is fantastic.
chris00nj
Young Luddite
Same scanner, same thoughts. I think it does an excellent job with slide film and black & white. With color negative, the software doesn't do the best job reversing the colors and it takes some tweaking in Elements (but that came free with the scanner).
ReeRay
Well-known
I find Silverfast does a good job on negs. People also refer to Vuescan due to it's in-built neg profiles.
nightfly
Well-known
Epson 4990 for everything. I'm sure a dedicated film scanner is better but never used one so wouldn't know.
Shadow detail doesn't matter much to me and I've gotten 13 x 19 prints that look great.
Shadow detail doesn't matter much to me and I've gotten 13 x 19 prints that look great.
ItsReallyDarren
That's really me
Microtek M1. Working good and getting results I like. Though sometimes the autofocus drives me crazy.
It had to be replaced after I first bought it due to malfunctioning issues but the replacement has been working smoothly ever since.
It had to be replaced after I first bought it due to malfunctioning issues but the replacement has been working smoothly ever since.
DougFord
on the good foot
For the first few years, 01-03, i used a Polaroid 4000 scanner. When it crapped out I bought the Minolta dimage scan elite 5400. The minolta has very good resolution and dr specs. If it gives up the ghost I'd probably buy one of the Nikon's that are still being sold on ebay that are NIB.
Darkhorse
pointed and shot
I get suitable results with color neg and vuescan when I set the base color for the neg. I typically set it to auto levels, throw a marquee around a section of the film base (with no image on it), then set it to "lock exposure", scan it again, then check "set film base color" or something like that, and then throw a marquee around a few frames and if i'm lucky the colors will look like they're supposed to. Then I check "lock image color" and then scan away.
mischivo
Member
Nikon Coolscan 5000. I use a Scanhancer too, but only for monochrome, and not the C41 stuff. The Nikon picks up far too much grit without a Scanhancer. For colour negatives and slides, I use it bare (in fact, I bought two slide holders, as those scanhancers are a pain to install) and with ICE.
Jason Sprenger
Well-known
Canoscan FS4000US for 35mm and an Epson V700 for bigger negs and slides up to 4x5. I use VueScan with both.
I wonder what I'll do should the Canoscan give out. I prefer 35mm film when traveling as it saves me from having to remember to recharge batteries and 35mm RF equipment is ideal for carrying.
I wish Kodak would come down to earth and offer something for the enthusiasts buying their film. A Creo IQSmart might be nice, but at $10k+ I'll never know. A $2k system to handle 35mm, 120 and 4x5 at 4000dpi would be a dream come true, but a basic $1k system for 35mm would suffice.
I wonder what I'll do should the Canoscan give out. I prefer 35mm film when traveling as it saves me from having to remember to recharge batteries and 35mm RF equipment is ideal for carrying.
I wish Kodak would come down to earth and offer something for the enthusiasts buying their film. A Creo IQSmart might be nice, but at $10k+ I'll never know. A $2k system to handle 35mm, 120 and 4x5 at 4000dpi would be a dream come true, but a basic $1k system for 35mm would suffice.
amateriat
We're all light!
I've been using a Minolta DS Elite 5400 (first version) for the last five years. Best dedicated 35mm scanner I've ever used.
For everything else, I have a tabloid-size UMAX PowerLook 2100XL flatbed with transparency lid, which I largely use for scanning entire rolls of film to print digital "contacts" with, and scan original art for others. It does have a scary assortment of film holders, including 6x6, 6x7, 645, 4x5, 8x10, and a holder for 32(!) mounted slides.
Most of the time I'm using VueScan with either scanner, but once in a while I use Minolta's driver with the 5400.
- Barrett
For everything else, I have a tabloid-size UMAX PowerLook 2100XL flatbed with transparency lid, which I largely use for scanning entire rolls of film to print digital "contacts" with, and scan original art for others. It does have a scary assortment of film holders, including 6x6, 6x7, 645, 4x5, 8x10, and a holder for 32(!) mounted slides.
Most of the time I'm using VueScan with either scanner, but once in a while I use Minolta's driver with the 5400.
- Barrett
Last edited:
Paddy C
Unused film collector
Are these worth (in your opinion) what people are routinely asking for them on the 'bay? I'm seeing prices for the second model around the $700-$800 range. Less than a new coolscan so I'm tempted but I'm not sure if it makes sense.
amateriat
We're all light!
I think they're worth a good deal, although the 'Bay, of course, has a way of distorting prices on worthwhile items to a ridiculous degree. I paid a little under $900 for mine brand-new in 2004; by rights, a used one, with all accessories, should sell in the $400-600 range. I understand the law of supply and demand, but sometimes things get silly (i.e. '60s-era muscle cars fetching $1M, and so on).
- Barrett
- Barrett
