Scanners....best for $$ ?

[Doug Nelson]

By Rj Allen on Monday, June 04, 2001 - 11:28 pm:

Has anyone tested several scanners or seen the test results with the d-max listed?

I don't need to hear what the corps. say. They lie about their d-max.

I have to wonder how well the quality holds up upon blowing up a scanned photo. I need to hear of experience. Thanks.

[airubin]

nikon IV slide scanner

I am considering getting the Nikon coolpix IV slide scanner. It has as dynamic range of 3.6, which is below the recommended value of 4.2. It is also half the price of the next model up. I’ve been told that the 3.6 is good enough for us serious amateurs.

Does anyone have any experience in this area? Also, are any of you familiar with other slide scanners of similar quality?

The flatbed scanners with the back light for slides have a dynamic range that is much to low.

TIA

Alan

[Doug Nelson]

I am in serious lust for the Nikon 4000 ED

I've heard nothing but wonderful things about it (and I've been looking). It's about $1500, but the dust-removal thing alone would make up that difference.

[thomasgeorge]

My only experience with the entry level scanners was with an HP silde/Negative scanner the local Photographer purchased and it sounds similar to the Nikon you described. It did a pretty good job. It didnt have the dust/scratch removal feature so there was some clean up to do, but the scans were nice and it was easy to use and good to learn on. I use a Minolta Multi-scan 11 and am pretty happy with it although if I was going to replace it I would probably go with the Nikon 8000D just because of the dust/scratch software features and firewire interface and its ability to handle the 110/220 format films (which the Minolta will do also although I understand the Nikon line of scanners from entry to top level work a bit quicker and the scans are really,really nice). If you scan mostly slides and 35mm film the scanner you are looking at would probably be pretty satisfactory. Like Doug said a while back, the published d-max and the actual d-max are seldom any where near each other. My Minolta is rated at 3.4D and I have yet to have any problems blowing a slide or scan up to 8x10 with results which please my customers. Hope this helps, Tom

[Chris W.]

Just food for thought here..

I had a minolta dimage scan dual that I purchased about 3 yrs ago...very very slow scanner.

Also, it quit working and when I called minolta they said it was a burnt out bulb and it had to be shipped to california so they could change it...at a cost of $80.00 plus shipping.

Had I known that when I bought the thing I wouldn't have bought it.

Just worth checking on things like that before you buy.

[thomasgeorge]

Chris, The bulbs are now around$100 or so Minolta told me a while back. Ouch!! The bright point is that on the Multi-scan line the user can change them. So far I have not had to replace one but I do plan on getting a spare. You are right, they are slow especially when running the ROC and/or GEM functions. I would not replace this one with another Minolta for several reasons including the SCSI interface and the slow speed(even with a 500 mz processor and 512 of RAM). The new Nikon 8000D looks real nice but at the current price its going to be awhile before one of those appears! When I checked around before buying I could find little in the way of negative comments about the Multi 2 and I must say that the minus points aside, it does do a good job for me. Tom

[airubin]

nikon scanner

Thanks all,

I’m with Doug in that I would prefer the 4000 D, but the price is more than I can justify at this point in my development. The next model down, the coolscan IV, is about $850. I’m looking for some positive input that the results will be satisfactory. My friend runs a camera store and I was told that it would be good enough.

Just looking for some help, here.

Alan