Which is the best Scanner?

[Geoff Endacott]

I hope this is the appropriate area rather than help and advice.

 

I have a lot of 35mm black & white negatives which really ought to be scanned for publication. I took a lot of photos in the 1970s which were never printed. I developed the films myself to save money and didn't get around to making prints of them all. As they are now about 35 years old there is a lot of material there which will probably be of interest to other enthusiasts. So I need a scanner which will give me high resolution scans from strips of 35mm black & white negatives.

 

What can the experts on here recommend in terms of make and model?

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Geoff Endacott

 

P.S. The photos might eventually end up on RMweb.

[Welly]

Get a scanner designed for scanning film negatives such as the Minolta Dimage It can give a much better quality images than standard flatbed scanners. My father uses it and it is excellent.

[Armchair Modeller]

A dedicated film scanner is best - but the specific make should not make a huge difference. Unless you plan on doing a lot of scanning in the future, it's probably better to save a bit of money and try to get something second-hand. I use a Dimage scanner which takes up to 6 negatives at a time on a strip. It will convert negatives as it scans, up to a very high resolution.

 

The key thing to bear in mind is that scanning will take a lot of time, so try to avoid having to do too much manipulation after the negatives have been scanned in. Having said that, Photoshop can pull out a remarkable amount of detail from dark areas - depends what you want to achieve really.

 

Richard

[TheSignalEngineer]

I use a Canon flatbed scanner and a Minolta Dimage film scanner. Quality wise the Dimage wins hands down.

[Adrian]

Nikon Coolscan V or one of its variants. One of the best , if not the best slide and film scanner for B/W and colour, and use it with Vuescan ( whatever is the latest version ) as that software also gives a RAW output for external manipulation. Its a bit of challenging thought process at first , but once tried- never bettered.

Another vote for Vuescan here. Doesn't matter which scanner you go for, it is worth investing in Vuescan to do the actually scanning. An excellent bit of software, enables batch processing, automatic numbering of images, can save in multiple image formats all in one go, allows colour correction profiles, matched profiles for your film type, multiple pass options etc etc. You can try it for free, it justs adds a watermark to the image.

[Pete Piszczek]

I use a Canon flatbed scanner and a Minolta Dimage film scanner. Quality wise the Dimage wins hands down.

 

Funny, I sold my Dimage because it wasn't any better than the Canoscan at scanning slides and negs, and I really only needed one device. When I bought the flatbed, the Dimage was sold to a friend.

 

Probably depends on the model and included software purchased, and my experience was about three years back.

 

 

At the time there were some very good comparison reviews on the web with the same film scanned with several scanners, and the Canoscan flatbeds were impressive when compared to other sub $1000 dedicated film scanners...

[Trevellan]

For my work I would never use anything except a dedicated film scanner. I currently use a Polaroid Sprintscan 120 hooked up to a Mac, but the scanner has done around 8,000 scans and is on its last legs. I've been monitoring the market for a replacement and have yet to find a "prosumer" model that delivers high quality scans from originals which range from 126 to 6 x 9.

[iak]

Is the Minolta stuff still available in the UK?

I've one at home but it is 8 years old mind; the best to get would be a Nikon Scanner these days.

A dedicated film scanner is always going to trump a flat bed, albeit that the flatbeds these days are pretty amazing.

And again I also have to support Vuescan. It is a wonderful piece of software I use both professionally and at home B)

It seems to get the best out of your scanner and its not a memory hog on ones PC or MAc - bonus!

[TheSignalEngineer]

Funny, I sold my Dimage because it wasn't any better than the Canoscan at scanning slides and negs, and I really only needed one device. When I bought the flatbed, the Dimage was sold to a friend.

 

Probably depends on the model and included software purchased, and my experience was about three years back.

 

 

At the time there were some very good comparison reviews on the web with the same film scanned with several scanners, and the Canoscan flatbeds were impressive when compared to other sub $1000 dedicated film scanners...

 

I have recently scanned a lot of negatives and slides, and have tried both with the same film for a comparison. For doing a slide show, my Canoscan 9000F on the automatic quick scanning programme is fast and good enough for the small screen. If I want to do a large print or see small detail I use my Dimage Scan Dual 3 and focus on the part of the negative that I want, rather than use the auto focus.

[Geoff Endacott]

Many thanks for the advice. I think I will look for a second-hand Minolta as they don't seem to be available new any more. They also seem to have been rather expensive when they first came out.

 

Geoff Endacott

 

 

[Armchair Modeller]

Many thanks for the advice. I think I will look for a second-hand Minolta as they don't seem to be available new any more. They also seem to have been rather expensive when they first came out.

 

Geoff Endacott

 

 

 

I might consider selling mine as I don't really have a use for it any more. It is about 6 years old but has never been used intensively - PM me and i will give a few details

 

Richard

[dave flint]

Sounds good. I did lots of scans using my nikon coolscan iii, which although working, has a scsi interface that renders it pretty useless these days..

 

I bought a nikon coolscan v that should (yet to try) work with windows 7. This is a killer bit of kit, BUT doesn't like Kodachrome film. This seems to be a common failing of the Nikon scanner range.

 

I have seen much better resuilts with KChrome on a Minolta scanner, so just have a good think about what your scanning first, as this may be important.

[spamcan61]

Sounds good. I did lots of scans using my nikon coolscan iii, which although working, has a scsi interface that renders it pretty useless these days..

 

My Acer Scanwit also uses SCSI, not too difficult to get it going on Vista, don't think anybody's managed it yet on Win 7 64 bit though.

[Dr.Glum]

Re Dave Flint's reply: I believe Kodachrome lacks the 4th layer that the IC function of Nikon Coolscan needs to do dirt removal. If you turn IC off, it should function just as well. My Coolscan III was OK in that mode with Kodak, but it died. I bopught a Epson V500 photo about three months ago which is pretty good, although the negative film holder is very iffy. BW image results are especially good. But USB is SO slow!

Dave, does your Coolscan still work, and do you want to sell it?

Cheers, Tony

[Pendennis]

I too have a Minolta DiMage plus Vuescan. Minolta opted out of the scanner market after the Minolta/Konica combo was taken over by Sony some years ago. It seems that the scanners are no longer supported; for example there is no software for Windows Vista or 7, although that fact is irrelevant if you purchase Vuescan. I am more than satisfied with my Minolta but if I were starting now I would probably opt for a Nikon Coolscan.

[hmrspaul]

Sounds good. I did lots of scans using my nikon coolscan iii, which although working, has a scsi interface that renders it pretty useless these days..

 

I bought a nikon coolscan v that should (yet to try) work with windows 7. This is a killer bit of kit, BUT doesn't like Kodachrome film. This seems to be a common failing of the Nikon scanner range.

 

I have seen much better resuilts with KChrome on a Minolta scanner, so just have a good think about what your scanning first, as this may be important.

 

I have never had any problem with Kodachrome - and of course is far better film than any of the other colour slide films. (RIP, sob).

 

My Nicon Coolscan IV came with Nikon software which allows the choice of Kodachrome or other positive films (which permits both colour and black and white slide film). Of course also does colour and b/w negatives. Only does 35mm either mounted slides or upto strips of 6 negatives. Must have done nearly 20K scans.

 

Paul Bartlett

[Krusty]

I am more than satisfied with my Minolta but if I were starting now I would probably opt for a Nikon Coolscan.

I once owned a Minolta 5400 for 36 hours (the dealer was closed on Sundays, so I had to wait a day before returning it). The only scanner still produced by Nikon is the Coolscan 9000, which is only manufactured in small batches and you have to sell your first-born to afford a new one. The Nikon Scan software was last upgraded to a version for XP-32 (the Mac version was last upgraded for OSX 10.4 and is hit-and-miss on later OSes). It hasn't been upgraded for XP-64 or Windows 7, although there is a hack involving persuading Nikon Scan to work with the Vuescan drivers and it will sometimes work in 7's XP compatibility mode. Vuescan and more recent versions of Silverfast (older versions used the Nikon drivers) work fine, but their user interfaces are poorer, not all scanner functions are supported properly and some people claim the scan quality is poorer. Personally I find Vuescan does a better job on negatives, but that Nikon Scan works slightly better on positives. Silverfast costs almost as much as Photoshop, which is somewhat hard to justify.

[50042]

Sounds good. I did lots of scans using my nikon coolscan iii, which although working, has a scsi interface that renders it pretty useless these days..

 

I bought a nikon coolscan v that should (yet to try) work with windows 7. This is a killer bit of kit, BUT doesn't like Kodachrome film. This seems to be a common failing of the Nikon scanner range.

 

I have seen much better resuilts with KChrome on a Minolta scanner, so just have a good think about what your scanning first, as this may be important.

 

 

I have been using a Nikon Coolscan V for about three years and find it to be fantastic, also no problem with Kodachrome (as long as you use the Kodachrome setting). Nikon do not (and have to plans to) support this scanner under Windows 7 32 or 64 bit, but someone has now written a driver for it. I installed this driver last week and now all is sweet and dandy.

 

Detail of driver here http://axelriet.blogspot.com/2009/10/nikon-ls-40-ls-50-ls-5000-scanners-on.html

 

This link to to old RM web shows some more of my photos all scanned on my Nikon Coolscan V, some are E-6 and some are Kodachrome http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=36968

[melmerby]

Re: earlier comments

I have an Epson Photo 4990

It is a flatbed and it is designed for photo/slide scanning.

 

It has hardware resolution of 4800 x 9600 with 48 bit colour depth, better than many so-called film scanners.

It is provided with dedicated holders for 35mm slides, 35mm roll film (positive or negative) and holders for various other sizes up to 10"x8".

 

The images are automatically sequenced by the software (e.g. if scanning 8 slides, 8 sequential images are saved.

Includes various apps to reduce dust, set correct colour balance etc.

Scanning some of my older slides the quality of scan is too good and shows up all the blemishes and grain!

It makes you realise how much film technology improved over the years.

 

Worth a look. (And much much cheaper than a Coolscan V)

 

Keith

[learningtobelost]

I currently have access to a coolscan, Epson V700 and Hassleblad Flextight X5 (£15,000 worth of scanning goodness) and I've got to say that even with Vuescan I don't rate the Nikon. I use the Flextight for exhibition work and the V700 for everything else. The V700 is a dark horse, it's not got the brand popularity that the Nikon range has but it is considerably more flexible and far less hassle. It also caters for everything from 35mm to 10"x8" negative and positive films.

 

Here is a 100% crop from the V700 and the image that it was cropped from.

 

 

 

The top image shows rendition of the grain on ilford 50asa 120mm roll film, taken on a Mamiya RZ67. The scan was at 1500ppi from memory, which produces a 15 megapixel image off of a 6x7 neg. You can go much higher, though this was unnececary with this image. My point here is that on a low grain film you can see the grain rendition, so for the vast majority of people it will be more than good enough.

[dave flint]

Re Dave Flint's reply: I believe Kodachrome lacks the 4th layer that the IC function of Nikon Coolscan needs to do dirt removal. If you turn IC off, it should function just as well. My Coolscan III was OK in that mode with Kodak, but it died. I bopught a Epson V500 photo about three months ago which is pretty good, although the negative film holder is very iffy. BW image results are especially good. But USB is SO slow!

Dave, does your Coolscan still work, and do you want to sell it?

Cheers, Tony

 

I think I also made a mistake in the choice of Kodachrome film used. I Found K64 too slow, and used a lot of K200m bought in bulk. It was a lot cheaper, but produced slides with low saturation and an odd pink/red cast.

 

If you're still interested, yes, i would like to sell. It was working when put away a good few months ago, and the old windows xp pc with the scsi card was working too when it was stored. I can test if your interested.

 

I would like to keep the negative holder though, as my replacement Coolscan 5000 didn't come with one - but if you fancy "just the box", then please PM me

 

 

 

 

 

[EddieB]

I have never had any problem with Kodachrome - and of course is far better film than any of the other colour slide films. (RIP, sob).

 

My Nicon Coolscan IV came with Nikon software which allows the choice of Kodachrome or other positive films (which permits both colour and black and white slide film). Of course also does colour and b/w negatives. Only does 35mm either mounted slides or upto strips of 6 negatives. Must have done nearly 20K scans.

 

Paul Bartlett

 

There is a slide feeder attachment for the Coolscan iV (SF-200), which can be loaded with up to 50 mounted slides and left to chunter on its merry way. Perhaps not best when individual settings need to be applied, but fine for batches where ultimate quality is less important. Quite expensive when I bought mine, and not that many available second-hand. Other models exist for other Nikon scanners.

 

Similarly no problems with Kodachrome scans, providing you adjust for the colour casts to which the film was prone (even when it wasn't being messed up during the period that "Box 14" were sending their stuff to France). Yes, Kodachrome 25 was a very special film, if you had enough light (and it did handle tropical conditions in a field of its own); but, to me, K64 was always a compromise and I made a slow migration to Provia (which I still use, often rated at 125ASA) - neutral balance, excellent shadow detail, fine grain - and an extra stop over K64.

[Gilwell Park]

This topic has not moved for almost a year and I would welcome an update. I have an Epson V500 scanner which produces excellent results from prints and slides. However slide scanning is rather slow and I have a lot to do. Can anyone give an update on dedicated slide scanners please?

 

Thank you

 

Roger

[6959]

Sounds good. I did lots of scans using my nikon coolscan iii, which although working, has a scsi interface that renders it pretty useless these days..

 

I bought a nikon coolscan v that should (yet to try) work with windows 7. This is a killer bit of kit, BUT doesn't like Kodachrome film. This seems to be a common failing of the Nikon scanner range.

 

I have seen much better resuilts with KChrome on a Minolta scanner, so just have a good think about what your scanning first, as this may be important.

 

Thanks for the advice. I was looking for a Coolscan to copy Kodachrome railway slides for publication so you saved me problems.

[Simon G]

I would also be interested in what is now available that will produce good results. My son gave me an "ION Powerscan" Film & Slide scanner for Christmas, but the quality is pretty poor - images arent sharp, poor colouring (very blue in many images) and very inconsistent brightness. The input slides are of a good quality, so it must be the scanner. I havent tried any negatives yet, but I dont hold out much hope.