Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Nikon Coolscan LS-2000?  (Read 3726 times)

Tristan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Nikon Coolscan LS-2000?
« on: July 03, 2006, 03:53:45 pm »

Hi

I'm thinking of dropping digital for a while and returning to good old 35mm b+w film for my landscapes.

I've come across a couple of LS-2000 negative scanners at a good price that would allow me to process on the PC rather than using the darkroom.

Does anyone have any experience of one of these neg scanners? Is it worth saving and buying a newer model?

Any thoughts or advice would be much appreciated. Sorry if I've posted this in the wrong forum.

Thanks
Tristan

Absolutely Nothing - Creative landscape photoblog
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.absolutely-nothing.co.uk/
Logged

jdemott

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 432
Nikon Coolscan LS-2000?
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2006, 05:34:22 pm »

I've had an LS-2000 for five years, maybe longer.  I still use it occasionally.  It is a reliable unit and works well.  It is capable of making excellent scans, although it takes some practice and some work to get the best results.  Here are a couple observations:

1. Over time, the mirror and optics attract dust and grime which noticeably  degrades the image quality.  I think they should be professionally cleaned, although some advocate do it yourself methods.  Any decent camera shop should be able to do the cleaning.

2.  The resolution (2700 ppi) is not equivalent to what is now available, although some could argue how much information is in a 35mm negative.  I generally found that with work I could produce digital prints that were equally acceptable to optical prints.  That is totally a subjective statement however and involves all kinds of judgments about noise, grain, viewing conditions, etc.

3.  The digital ICE software for scratch and dust removal doesn't work for B&W negatives (or for Kodachrome).

4.  The unit requires a SCSI interface.  As I recall, the unit came with a SCSI board (but I may have had to buy that separately--I'm not sure).  It is definitely not plug and play, so expect to spend a little time on set up.

5.  Getting the best results sometimes requires two scans per negative to maximize dynamic range.  For color work, expect to spend time color balancing.

6.  Not all films scan equally well.  For B&W, I had decent results with T Max.  Films with very dense shadows, like Velvia, can be a challenge, as can grainy films.

My own experience was that when I bought the scanner, I quickly went to almost all digital printmaking, largely because of the ability to do good color work in a home "darkroom."  When I bought my first DSLR, I quickly abandoned film, largely because a digital camera eliminates most noise and grain and eliminates most need for color correction.

If you're interested in scanning, an LS-2000 is probably worth a try.  I assume the price isn't too great these days so you won't be risking a whole lot.  Make sure you get the SCSI adapter board (if you're using a PC) and cable, as well as the negative carriers and scan software.  It would be best if you can see a scan to be sure it's clean (look for halos along high contrast edges).  If you have to buy any accessories or pay for a cleaning, the bargain price might not be such a bargain.

If I were going back to B&W film, I think I would probably go all the way back and fire up the enlarger again.  But that's just me.
Logged
John DeMott

dlashier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 518
    • http://www.lashier.com/
Nikon Coolscan LS-2000?
« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2006, 05:38:30 pm »

Hi Tristan,

I assume the reason you're considering returning to film is because of DR. If so then you might consider the current Nikon as I believe that DR is one of the major improvements. I've got a Coolscan III which is similar to the LS-2000 but considering upgrading to either the 5000 or V, primarily for DR. Even the affordable Coolscan-V should have noticibly better DR than the 2000.

- DL
Logged

Tristan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Nikon Coolscan LS-2000?
« Reply #3 on: July 04, 2006, 12:34:07 pm »

Thanks for the replies, useful info.

Extra dynamic range is not my reason at all. Reason for returning to film for a while is for a change of mindset more than anything.

I find if I have B&W film in camera and no other choice but to use that then it forces me to see things in a different light. Does anyone else find that? I'm also hoping it will make me think more and refine technique. Grain is perhaps not everyones choice for landscapes, but personally I love it - it can add lots to an image.

I've actually decided to save the money and just use the enlarger to do prints and then scan on the flatbed. Hopefully I'll stick with it until I've saved for a 5D body

Thanks
Tristan

Absolutely Nothing - Creative landscape photoblog
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.absolutely-nothing.co.uk/
Logged

jani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
    • Øyet
Nikon Coolscan LS-2000?
« Reply #4 on: July 04, 2006, 06:44:41 pm »

Quote
I find if I have B&W film in camera and no other choice but to use that then it forces me to see things in a different light. Does anyone else find that?
I performed a Jedi mind trick on myself instead.

I told myself, "now you'll see in black and white", and then I went and looked at scenes to find stuff that worked well in black and white.

Try going out with a pretense that you cannot shoot anything else than black and white.  Imagine that you have to look more at visual contrast and patterns to achieve your goal.

If you've seen a bunch of RGB->BW conversions, you'll have a general idea about how reds, yellows, greens, blues, magentas etc. will appear in a straight conversion.

Don't take this as disencouragement from taking pictures with chemical film, but rather as possible approaches to shooting BW with digital.
Logged
Jan

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
Nikon Coolscan LS-2000?
« Reply #5 on: July 11, 2006, 12:41:32 pm »

Quote
I find if I have B&W film in camera and no other choice but to use that then it forces me to see things in a different light. Does anyone else find that? I'm also hoping it will make me think more and refine technique. Grain is perhaps not everyones choice for landscapes, but personally I love it - it can add lots to an image.

When I shoot an image, I only care about getting composition, lighting, exposure, and focus right, so I have the best possible quality recorded image to work with. The decision as to whether the final image should be B&W or color, or something in-between, is deferred until I'm working the image in Photoshop. If I decide a B&W treatment is in order, I use Convert To B&W Pro from theimagingfactory.com to convert it. This plug-in allows one to simulate any B&W film ever made, as well as films never made, and gives a live screen preview so that you can tweak the adjustments until you have just the look you want. With film, you can tweak contrast, but you are 100% locked in to the color response curve ov the film and any filter(s) on your lens at the moment of exposure. For this reason, I will never go back to film.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up