film scanner recommendation

Discussion in 'Scanners' started by Melvyn Kopstein, Jul 21, 2003.

  1. I am trying to decide between Nikon's Coolscan IV and 4000ED models. Any
    opinions on whether the 4000ED is worth the extra cost?
     
    Melvyn Kopstein, Jul 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Melvyn Kopstein

    JR Guest

    I am buying the Minolta Scan Elite 5400. Cheaper than both Nikons,
    better specs, and 5400 dpi....I just saw it in stock at my local camera
    store.

    JR
     
    JR, Jul 21, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Melvyn Kopstein

    Ron Goodman Guest

    Would you mind loaning it to Ed Hamrick when you get it? I sent him an
    email last week asking about Vuescan support for it and he said he's
    still waiting for a sample from Minolta.
     
    Ron Goodman, Jul 21, 2003
    #3
  4. Melvyn Kopstein

    Matt Clara Guest

    The 4000 has a much greater dynamic range--very important IMO. Instead of
    the IV, I'd look at the Minolta Elite II, used, or Elite III, new.
     
    Matt Clara, Jul 21, 2003
    #4



  5. From someone who's had both ... the IV will interpolate up to the 4000's max
    res' and offer an identical A3'ish sized print (no photographer I know can
    tell them apart). This applies to slides encompassing a full tonal range -
    black to white - as well. The one advantage the 4000 had for me was
    multipass scanning - this did denerate a very slightly better file than the
    IV ... but at the cost of even longer scanning times.
    The new 5400 res Minolta to me seems like a waste of scanning and processing
    time (such big file sizes for what?). Even the IV resolves the grain of 100F
    .... anything else from a desktop film scanner is a 'waste' IMO.

    See if you can find a Nikon pro dealer who can demo both scanners. Take
    along a sharp slide with a full range of tone. Scan with both machines at
    the same setting ('cept for res'). Then do nothing in PS 'cept resize the
    IV's file to match the 4000's. Print at A3 - see if you can spot the
    difference. If you try this I'll bet you'll go for the IV

    Simon
     
    Simon Stanmore, Jul 21, 2003
    #5
  6. Melvyn Kopstein

    pioe(rmv) Guest

    Yes, I have done this test:

    http://www.coldsiberia.org/scantest.htm

    Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
     
    pioe(rmv), Jul 21, 2003
    #6
  7. Melvyn Kopstein

    JR Guest

    Not if you are enlarging, and/or cropping....Plus if you can get a
    higher res scanner, with a higher Dmax (which may be more important than
    the resolution), and all the capabilities the minolta has, at a LOWER
    price, then why not...you know you don't HAVE to scan at 5400, you can
    select a lower resolution, like 4000 if you want to limit your scan time
    and processing time.

    JR
     
    JR, Jul 21, 2003
    #7
  8. Melvyn Kopstein

    Marko B. Guest

    Get the Minolta Elite 5400.
    Great scanner for the money!

    m.
     
    Marko B., Jul 21, 2003
    #8
  9. Melvyn Kopstein

    pioe(rmv) Guest

    In Norway, that Minolta is $800, whereas the Nikon LS-40 is $640.

    Per Inge Oestmoen
    http://www.alpha-gruppen.com/
     
    pioe(rmv), Jul 21, 2003
    #9
  10. Melvyn Kopstein

    Marko B. Guest

    He was asking about Coolscan IV and 4000ED models not LS-40. Don't know if
    Coolscan IV and LS-40 are the same thing.

    Here the Minolta was 630 EUR while i haven't checked any other prices.

    m.
     
    Marko B., Jul 21, 2003
    #10
  11. Those are three different designations for exactly the same unit. There
    is no such thing as a "non-ED" Coolscan IV.

    The history of Nikon's 'entry-level' film scanner line goes like this:

    LS-10 aka Coolscan
    LS-20 aka Coolscan II
    LS-30 aka Coolscan III
    LS-40 aka Coolscan IV

    The more sophisticated series is:

    LS-1000 aka Super Coolscan
    LS-2000
    LS-4000

    The LS-10, 20, and 1000 share the same chassis, and so do the LS-30, 40,
    2000, and 4000. The LS-30 and LS-2000 have introduced the ICE
    technology. LS-40 and 4000 ended the SCSI era with their USB and
    Firewire interfaces and both are fitted with lenses using "ED" elements.

    IMHO, the best deal to be had is still a second-hand LS-30 flashed with
    the LS-2000 firmware thus providing the full performance of the latter
    model.

    Ralf
     
    Ralf R. Radermacher, Jul 22, 2003
    #11
  12. Have they said anything about the dynamic range of both scanners?

    Ralf
     
    Ralf R. Radermacher, Jul 22, 2003
    #12
  13. Melvyn Kopstein

    pioe(rmv) Guest

    The LS-2000 was discontinued before I bought my LS-40 scanner, but
    photographers who have used both testify that the LS-40 is far
    superior in the rendition of sharp detail as compared to the LS-2000.

    (The LS-40 cannot do multipass-scanning with the Nikon software, but
    that is another story)

    Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway
    http://www.coldsiberia.org/
     
    pioe(rmv), Jul 22, 2003
    #13
  14. The LS-30 and the LS-2000 share the same chassis. And the LS-40 and the
    LS-4000 may share the same chassis, but the LS-4000 is quite different from
    the LS-2000.
    Is there a web page that shows how it is done? Using Vuescan instead of
    NikonScan may be enough to get good results from an LS-30.




    Philip Homburg
     
    Philip Homburg, Jul 22, 2003
    #14
  15. How did you measure the Dmax of the LS-40? Color targets don't seem to
    go that far.




    Philip Homburg
     
    Philip Homburg, Jul 22, 2003
    #15
    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.