best film scanner under $1000

Discussion in 'Scanners' started by Mike - EMAIL IGNORED, Nov 12, 2005.

  1. Last December I queried this group regarding a film scanner
    with these criteria:

    * Under $1000
    * Best possible resolution
    * At a lower priority, automatic feed for slides and negatives.

    These days I use NC160 and UC100 film with and good lenses,
    and I like excellent detail.

    At the time, the Minolta 5400 appeared to be the choice, and I
    was not going to get the automatic feed. For unrelated reasons,
    I did not make the purchase at that time, but I am about to do
    it now.

    Since eleven months have passed, I wonder if have there been any
    developments that might alter my choice.

    Thanks in advance for your advice.

    Mike - EMAIL IGNORED, Nov 12, 2005
    1. Advertisements


    uw wayne Guest

    uw wayne, Nov 13, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. You might want to consider the Minolta 5400 II rather than the earlier
    and more stubborn 5400.

    I considered this scanner as well, but instead went for the Nikon
    Coolscan V. It scans at 4000dpi (14-bit extrapolated) and give me about
    120MB files or so. The software works very well, and the scanner runs
    flawlessly. I have seen less than rosey reviews about the Minolta
    products reliability and software.
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Nov 14, 2005

    Father Kodak Guest

    On ebay, you can even find the Coolscan V's big brother, the 5000 ED,
    for under $1000. (specifically $979, plus shipping of course.)

    Father Kodak
    Father Kodak, Nov 14, 2005
  5. At B&H, you can find the 5000 ED for $979 (just checked today's

    However, he was also interested in the slide feeder, which is an
    additional $450. Works well for me, at least.
    David Dyer-Bennet, Nov 19, 2005

    Father Kodak Guest

    on ebay, for 3 and change.
    Father Kodak, Nov 19, 2005
  7. The only difference that I have noticed in my reading is that the 5000ED
    has 16-bit rather than 14-bit reads (so no interpolating the extra
    range) and the dynamic range is a bit higher, from 4.2 to 4.9. I don't
    find either of these significant for the average user. By the way, both
    of these "features" add up to a reduction in scan speed.
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Nov 21, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.