35mm Slide Scanner suggestions ?

Hi,

Just did a big search across the forums, but didnt find any recent threads about slide scanners. I have a fairly large collection (> 1000) of slides to scan. When I looked last year the best choices seemed to be the Nikon Coolscan V ED or the Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400 II. Does anyone have experience with these, or would like to recommend something better? I would like to keep the price down below $1,000 and some sort of batch scanning capability would be great. Thanks....

I would compare the 5400 with the Nikon 5000, not the less expensive Nikon models. I have the Minolta 5400 I and Nikon 4000 (older 5000 model) on my desk at the moment. The Minolta is less expensive and gives similar or better results. For the money and results go for the Minolta 5400 (version II today, only USB2, not firewire).

I can heartily recommend the Nikon Coolscan V ED. I had 500 (!) Velvia slides to scan over a few days and once I had my settings hapenning, I found that I could work on another computer and just keep feeding the scanner slides. I'm not sure whether there's a batch scanning attacment for slides for this scanner, though. Just have a big, fast Firewire drive (or 2) to send the files to! Some of the scans are about to appear in a 12 page spread of a glossy travel mag, so there's no problems with the quality.

My thoughts are that you might want to consider a flat-bed scanner -- the latest ones do a good job with slides, and cost a lot less than $1000. Latest Epson or Canon models would be preferable.

The job will be much quicker and batch scanning is a given. And if at the end you don't like the quality, well at least you have a top document scanner for all those other jobs.

If you're fixed on a slide scanner, then why not cut your costs by buying on eBay, and then selling it there at the end of the job? You might even come out even!

--
Mustafa

A flatbed scanner might meet your needs at a lower price than a dedicated film scanner. I have the Epson Perfection 4990 Photo and am very pleased with it. The following is a review of this scanner and comparisons to the Nikon 4000ED which I also have. I find that this review jibs with my experience with both

Plus you can scan medium format and large format film.

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%204990/Page%201.htm

--
Dan T

I have the more expensive Nikon 5000. . . .it scans quicker then the lower priced 5000.

I actually need to sell it if you are interested, as I need to get the 9000 for my MF work. I'm sure it hasn't had 50 scans go through it. If you don't need the speed the lower priced one is just about the same though there are other differences as well.
--
Avatar Photography
http://www.avatarphotoart.com
Alley Cats . . . Urban Tails (the book)
http://www.alleycatphotos.com

....Nikon CoolScan V ED, or Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 II.

I chose the minolta because of its 5400 dpi capability (true optical), 16bit output, and it was ICE-4 compliant (ICE, GEM, ROC & SHO).

Even after buying I was not totally sure, but... After having scanned 100+ slides / negatives / B&W, and after seeing the color output, how easy is to work with, how dependable is the AF, how easy is to AF or MF focus by pin-pointing a specific area of the screen, and how well the 6-slide/negative batch-feed works, I can whole-heartedly recommend it.

My only two comments is that it is relatively light-weight (because plastic / synthetic materials are used on the exterior), and the "pressure-feel" rather than "tactile-feel" of the 6-frame feeder (you have to insert it in the middle, then, as you push it in, it slides towards the right, and then, after applying a bit of pressure, the scanner swallows it by itself, and moves it in, and from left to right. It's pretty cool, though)

I will try to post some pics, later.

In any case, you will NOT go wrong with any of these two choices, though. However, the 5400 II is, absolutely, the best bang for the buck.

Happy shooting!

I'll also endorse the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 II.
I've gotten great results out of it. I think the 5400 dpi 16 bit
scans give you rgb files somewhere in the neighborhood
of 200 MB! It is a bit plasticky in construction but if it's securely
planted on a desk it's not an issue. I do wish it had Firewire, but
its USB2 connection has been reliable. I'm using it with a G5
running Panther 10.3.9 and Photoshop CS.

Do you use Minolta's supplied scanning software or have you found something better?

Vuescan and nothing else. Been using it for years on various scanners, including the 5400 and Nikon 4000, which I´m using at the moment. And as I said before, while the Nikon is an excellent scanner (but expensive), I've had even better results with the Minolta 5400.

I've been looking at a Nikon scanner for a while. Last week I sat down and thought about what I wanted to do with the digitized images.

All I really wanted to do was post old images to a website for friends, family and some associates so I used an alternative approach.

I used an old slide viewer - just an angled, stepped lightbox, except that it's about 10 years old and the old bulb and plastic produced a very yellow cast... (I couldn't use my two decent lightboxes as I'd lent them out to friends who still use film).

I didn't want to spend days on pp so tried the following:

dodgy slide viewer/lightbox
tripod - obviously

Olympus E1 with 50-200 and the EX25 extension tube (in preference to my my Canon DSLR's)
Auto WB - it seemed to work as well as a custom WB
some exp comp as required - typically plus 1/3 or 2/3
MLU
f10
SHQ jpeg
RGB
iso 100

In Adobe Elements (as that was what was on the PowerBook) I ran a quick smartfix (because of the yellow slide viewer). Because my images had part of the slide frame/holder in the image, I simply cropped to 6 x 4.

The added bonus was that for some of my images with my old EOS3 and the infamous 17-35L, I could reduce the effect of the soft edges where appropriate...
Of course, some USM.
Minimum pp.

I then dropped the images into iPhoto as this was an easy way to upload the files to smugmug.

Okay, it's not a full replacement for a nice Nikon scanner with ICE (many of the slides were very dusty despite being kept in boxes and some images will need to be cleaned up) but it has proved a useable solution for my intended purpose. The exercise did remind me just how much I used to spend on Fujichrome and Kodachrome though!

Here are some samples. Images from the 1980's using a Canon T90 and an old 135mm lens:







The last two were Fujichrome pushed one stop. 200 ASA was extravagant then ;-).

It does work well for more detailed images and portraits but these images brought back some good (indulgent) memories.

You can reference some of my full res scans in my FIlm 2 album at http://www.fototime.com/inv/D163377BD1A059A . Except when noted, all were scanned autofocus/expose, ICE (except b&w), and CROP only with no post processing except to insert copyright. My workflow can be seen in my CS5000 album at http://www.fototime.com/inv/3F84707DD83754D .

I have scanned over 3,000 frames now and found these to be the advantages of the Nikon Coolscan 5000 scanner:

Accuracy - will scan every film with every type of exposure faithfully and automatically. Just as important, using the provided software, it can salvage grossly underexposed film similar to my Canon 20D.

Ability to scan any and all films without specific film profiles - I've bought and used, albeit older scanners like the Epson 2450 and Canon Canoscan FS2720, that even with Silverfast or Vuescan could simply not scan some films well enough to post process regardless of technique such as "scan b&w as a positive ..." or use "scanner friendy film...".

It is the fastest 35mm scanner today before, during and after the scan - You don't need a film holder for strips of film of 2 to 6 frames. Simply insert them and scan. You don't need special film profiles for each brand, simply select slides, negatives, kodachromes or b&w. Full res scans without ICE is just over 30secs, and with ICE just under 50secs on my PC. On the same PC, it takes just under 20 seconds to process a RAW file from my 20D. Ironically enough, if I have dust on the sensor there is no ICE so I have to manually remove them which is much longer then it takes to scan! Most importantly, because of the previous two reasons, the images will not require post processing unless you want to.

You may settle for less then the CS5K, but consider your time and that quite possibly, this may be the last 35mm scanner you will ever need as it's build quality is meant to last.

mlondon said:

Hi,
Just did a big search across the forums, but didnt find any recent
threads about slide scanners. I have a fairly large collection
(> 1000) of slides to scan. When I looked last year the best choices
seemed to be the Nikon Coolscan V ED or the Minolta DiMage Scan
Elite 5400 II. Does anyone have experience with these, or would
like to recommend something better? I would like to keep the price
down below $1,000 and some sort of batch scanning capability would
be great. Thanks....

Click to expand...

I had a similar task to perform. In the end chose a Nikon (Super) Coolscan 4000ED plus an SF-210 batch scanner. The Digital ICE worked miracles on my father's 40-year-old Agfa and Kodachromes, automatically sorting out the blue shift caused by age. The batch scanner came in useful - but its reliability depends on the mounts you've used (fine with CS type mounts, not great with Kodak paper mounts).

If you are going to use ICE bear in mind that you need plenty of memory and a decent speed processor - my PC had 1GB of fast matched RAM and a hyperthreaded P2.8 and scan time was about 5 minutes per slide. However, the Coolscan was pretty much designed for Mac usage (firewire port only) so may well work faster on one...

...Only the $900+ "Super CoolScan" is faster than the 5400II, except that does not reach the 5400 dpi mark. For the rest, the 5400II still does not have a match, in the speed department, in its category/price range, since it will crank a 40MP file in around 25 secs, without ICE processing.

Also, the 5400II slide-feeder allow you to insert them empty and use the open-slot in the outer end to pull and insert a slide, without having to unload the tray. You do have to use the negative/positive film tray, but it works wonderfully to keep the film straight, alingned, even for cleaning it while attached to the tray, before insertion. I do this often, which helps me avoide transfering "oily" residues from my fingers, when I do not have gloves or the necessay tools for proper cleaning and handling.

The 5400II also focus, exposes and colorizes automatically, with astonishing precision, and no user intervention. NO need to specify for Kodachrome media, separately. Just select "Color Negative, Color Positive, B&W negative, B&W Positive". That's it. The software is very, very easy to use (in my opinion), yet it has certain intelligence, like caching your scan and allowing to output multiple EC'd vesions (with no-rescanning), for further shadows and highlights optimization in Photoshop, for instance.

Additionally, Minolta offers a $49 extended 1-year warranty, for a total of two-years. Not sure what the Nikon's is (which is, without any doubt, an excellent product, too.)

No-one will go wrong with either the Nikon, or, the Minolta, as said before. Now, for max speed, resolution and best-bang for the buck, probably the 5400II is the way to go for anyone who has not purchased a scanner before.

Happy scanning!

Actually, in Photo.net, here and mag reviews, it has been widely reported that the 5400 I & II's speed are not exactly as advertized, is this your first hand experience? Also, it seems there's a difference in speed when scanning slides or negatives too. There is no one, who operates either the Nikon or Minolta scanners that will make a full res scan without ICE unless when scanning b&w as no ICE works with it. Also, since ICE does not degrade the scan quality at all and only adds less then 20 seconds on the CS5K, it is always on.

Anyway, using my CS5K on my 2.4Ghz 1Gig RAM P4 (auto expose/focus, crop, ICE), any film (except b&w of course) here are my scan time vs Nikon's listed times:
Preview nothing on - my time = 25sec vs Nikon time of 17sec
1X nothing on - my time = 32sec vs Nikon time of 20sec
1X, ICE - my time = 49sec vs Nikon time of 46sec
1X, GEM2 - my time = 2:39 vs Nikon time of 1:52
16X, ICE - my time = 6:56 vs Nikon time of none listed
16X, ICE, GEM2 - my time = 9:00 vs Nikon time of none listed

When it comes to handling, the CS5K has no equal. Included are feeders for strips of film or individual slides - no film holders to fumble with and you will never have to rotate any scans at all. Optionally, there are whole roll and 50 slide feeders.

I have scanned over 3,000 frames of all the different films available, some in my previously posted Film 2 Album, as well as my workflow in the CS5000 album. Do you have any posted times, results and workflow?

BTW, there are also lots of posted comparisons regarding the "build quality" of the two, and nobody will be buying any extended warranties on any of the Coolscan scanners as they will be a complete waste of money.

LesDMess said:

Actually, in Photo.net, here and mag reviews, it has been widely
reported that the 5400 I & II's speed are not exactly as
advertized, is this your first hand experience?

Click to expand...

I will measure (with stop-watch) a 40MP scan (@5400II) with no features enabled. My machine has 2 Gigs of ECC DDR memory, and a Pentium 3.0HT with a 10,000RPM SATA drive. I will post the results during next week.

LesDMess said:

Also, it seems
there's a difference in speed when scanning slides or negatives
too.

Click to expand...

Have not noticed any particular difference, though. I will confirm this to you.

LesDMess said:

There is no one, who operates either the Nikon or Minolta
scanners that will make a full res scan without ICE unless when
scanning b&w as no ICE works with it.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. I have plenty of Color Negatives that do not really need ICE. On the contrary, GEM seems to be mandatory, since I find print-film grain (and some slides) a JOKE compared to the signal-to-noise ratio that I get with, say, the 1D MarkII.

LesDMess said:

When it comes to handling, the CS5K has no equal. Included are
feeders for strips of film or individual slides - no film holders
to fumble with and you will never have to rotate any scans at all.
Optionally, there are whole roll and 50 slide feeders.

Click to expand...

I think that no one disagrees on the CS5K capabilities. It is just that Minolta's front-load tray and transport systems seems to be working very, very well for everything but large batches. I am fine with that, as I want to use the scan to get the best possible image quality from selected film memories. And this is the scanner for this purpose.

LesDMess said:

Do you have any posted times, results
and workflow?

Click to expand...

I will get back to you with the stop-watch results (nevertheless, we will not be able to compare directly, because I will be measuring the output of a higher resoltion scan, vs. a lower-one on the Nikon). My workflow is simply: Load film-tray and press the "Scan" icon. That simple. So simple, indeed, that it is hard to skin-in. Watch just a few examples:

http://www.pbase.com/feharmat/film_scans

LesDMess said:

nobody will be buying any extended
warranties on any of the Coolscan scanners as they will be a
complete waste of money.

Click to expand...

I believe you may need to review your statement, though. If I can have two years of warranty, for a mere $49, why not give myself the option to have it? Any extra protection is always welcome, though.

Happy scanning!

PIXSurgeon said:

Not necessarily. I have plenty of Color Negatives that do not
really need ICE. On the contrary, GEM seems to be mandatory, since
I find print-film grain (and some slides) a JOKE compared to the
signal-to-noise ratio that I get with, say, the 1D MarkII.

Click to expand...

I know what you mean as the Canon DSLR's are the king of high ISOs, both film and all other DSLRs. But isn't it ironic that my film scans are cleaner then my 20D files as there is no ICE to process out sensor dusts!

PIXSurgeon said:

It is just
that Minolta's front-load tray and transport systems seems to be
working very, very well for everything but large batches.

Click to expand...

I had two other scanners before this and the I never knew what a hassle it was until I got the CS5K that doesn't need it. Have you tried it?

PIXSurgeon said:

That simple. So simple, indeed, that it is hard to
skin-in. Watch just a few examples:

Click to expand...

I'm glad your experience has been troublefree . . .

PIXSurgeon said:

I believe you may need to review your statement, though. If I can
have two years of warranty, for a mere $49, why not give myself the
option to have it? Any extra protection is always welcome, though.

Click to expand...

You know that on the web only you only hear the failures, and I haven't read one for any of the Nikons but considerable for the others. Believe me the build reviews have been in . . . BTW, I hipe you didn't buy a MACK warranty . . .

PIXSurgeon said:

Happy scanning!

3,000 scans later, it has been uneventful and I have been getting the best possible results very quickly ;-)

Click to expand...

I noticed in your album that you also have an 8MP DSLR, have you run comparisons between your scans and the DSLR?

I've run some preliminary ones and here are a couple of full res unretouched shots (> 1Meg files) between Fuji Velvia 100F



; and the same scene using the same lens on my 20



;. I have a few others to try out in the coming weeks that I hope will be more definitive.

There is no doubt that the Plustek Opticfilm 7200dpi film scanner that retails for $189, is the best in its category/price range either but nobody claims it is capable of providing comparable results with any of the 4,000dpi Coolscans.

PIXSurgeon said:

except that does not reach the 5400 dpi mark. For the rest, the
5400II still does not have a match, in the speed department, in its
category/price range, since it will crank a 40MP file in around 25
secs, without ICE processing.

Click to expand...

...is on the works (Fuji Provia 100F+50mm Prime+Minolta 5400II vs. Canon EOS 1D MarkII+24_105 f/4L zoom, on both .JPG and .CR2

I have a 36 exposure roll loaded, and 26 to go... Choosing each frame, one by one.

I will probably finish by end of December.

Stay tuned...

I

...on your post if you refer to the Super CoolScan or the V ED.

Check this out: a comparo of V ED, 5400 II and others, in the UK:

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Minolta%20Dimage/page-1.htm

As you can see, the V ED produces results that are any better (except lower-contrast / lower MTF on noisier shadows) than the MInolta 5400II.

I certainly believe that the V ED (is that the one you own) is also an excellent piece of equipment. However, the 5400 II simply has it all (and more), except large-batch feeders / adapters.

Happy scanning!