35mm Film Scanner Recommendation

[Kumar]

I need to scan a couple of hundred 35mm negatives. Is the MINOLTA DiMAGE Scan Elite Ⅱa reasonable choice? How does it compare to the Scan Elite 5400 II, apart from resolution, of course? Or a CoolScan?

Thanks,
Kumar

[JohnBrew]

I need to scan a couple of hundred 35mm negatives. Is the MINOLTA DiMAGE Scan Elite Ⅱa reasonable choice? How does it compare to the Scan Elite 5400 II, apart from resolution, of course? Or a CoolScan?

Thanks,
Kumar

The 5400 and 5400 II use different light sources.  I have had a 5400 (original version) since it came out and I would be a very sad person if it died.

[mistybreeze]

Back in the day, ICP.org in NYC offered an intensive desktop Scan course where every desktop scanner was tested. I believe the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi PRO won the dmax tests (and the winning scans came from Vuescan software). Regardless of film size, the Multi PRO produced the best shadow detail.

In very close second place came Nikon's Coolscan 8000 but everyone complained about the film holders. Minolta's film holders were far superior.

Since Minolta has long been absent from the scanning business, it's safer to go with Nikon, especially is you wish to resell the scanner once you are done. With the two machines mentioned, the differences were negligible.

As a former medium format film shooter, the 35mm-only models were not a consideration for me.

[Mark D Segal]

All these Minolta models are discontinued because they vacated that line of business seveal years ago, therefore even if you find one, support could be an issue.

 Nikon Coolscan (say models 4000/5000) is also highly recommended, as is the Epson V750-M Pro.

[Mark D Segal]

I should have added: you also need to consider software. The very best film scanning software available is Silverfast. It comes in various versions, and is configured and priced specifically for each scanner. Their pricing for Nikon Coolscan has been much higher than it was for the Minolta scanners. An elementary version of Silverfast comes bundled with the Epson scanner and may be suitable for your needs. If not, they probably offer an up-grade arrangement. Vuescan is a very decent program, inexpensive, been downloaded millions of times, but Silverfast offers much more by way of features and image adjustment control.

[Geoff Wittig]

I should have added: you also need to consider software. The very best film scanning software available is Silverfast. It comes in various versions, and is configured and priced specifically for each scanner. Their pricing for Nikon Coolscan has been much higher than it was for the Minolta scanners. An elementary version of Silverfast comes bundled with the Epson scanner and may be suitable for your needs. If not, they probably offer an up-grade arrangement. Vuescan is a very decent program, inexpensive, been downloaded millions of times, but Silverfast offers much more by way of features and image adjustment control.

Minolta's scanners are currently still eligible for service through Sony. My Dimage scan Elite 5400 was evaluated by a Sony repair center, and I got it up & running again with a new power supply ordered through Sony.

You can also use Hamrick's Vuescan software to run the Minolta scanners, which is important because Minolta of course is no longer writing driver software, so you need a 3rd party app. to run the scanner under Vista.

[Kumar]

Thanks, all. I bought a ScanElite II. I do have an Epson 4990 that I use for 120 and 4x5 film. I just bought a Betterscanning wetmount kit as well. I am quite familiar with VueScan, and am happy with the results. The 35mm scanner is only for this particular project, so I didn't want to spend a lot of money. The 5400II or CoolScan 5000ED are probably better, but looking at their prices, I could have bought a Minolta MultiPro or Nikon 8000ED for maybe a little more.

Cheers,
Kumar

[jjj]

I should have added: you also need to consider software. The very best film scanning software available is Silverfast. It comes in various versions, and is configured and priced specifically for each scanner. Their pricing for Nikon Coolscan has been much higher than it was for the Minolta scanners. An elementary version of Silverfast comes bundled with the Epson scanner and may be suitable for your needs. If not, they probably offer an up-grade arrangement. Vuescan is a very decent program, inexpensive, been downloaded millions of times, but Silverfast offers much more by way of features and image adjustment control.

I did some testing a while back regarding letting scanner software tweak image versus no tweaking until image was in PS.
The zeroed settings and then tweaked in PS scan was waaaaaay better.
My test was fairly informal and not exhaustive, but as a Programme like PS has so much better control over image processing, even compered to Silverfast, why use SF? Does it allow the scanner to scan better? Software used can probably affect the scan throughput, but is it worth using the scanner software tweaking parameters rather than leaving it all to PS or these days LR/ACR?

[jjj]

Thanks, all. I bought a ScanElite II. I do have an Epson 4990 that I use for 120 and 4x5 film. I just bought a Betterscanning wetmount kit as well. I am quite familiar with VueScan, and am happy with the results. The 35mm scanner is only for this particular project, so I didn't want to spend a lot of money. The 5400II or CoolScan 5000ED are probably better, but looking at their prices, I could have bought a Minolta MultiPro or Nikon 8000ED for maybe a little more.

I'd offer to buy it off you afterwards, but it's a long way to post!  
Though I do have a friend returning from Japan in July, but I'm sure she'll have plenty of her own baggage to carry.

Oddly I was looking at buying one of these earlier today as I have plenty of slides I could do with scanning into computer. Not many around, shall we say.

[Mark D Segal]

I did some testing a while back regarding letting scanner software tweak image versus no tweaking until image was in PS.
The zeroed settings and then tweaked in PS scan was waaaaaay better.
My test was fairly informal and not exhaustive, but as a Programme like PS has so much better control over image processing, even compered to Silverfast, why use SF? Does it allow the scanner to scan better? Software used can probably affect the scan throughput, but is it worth using the scanner software tweaking parameters rather than leaving it all to PS or these days LR/ACR?

I've scanned a great many colour negatives using Silverfast Studio Ai6, as written-up in essays on this website; there's no question in my mind based on extensive experience with these tehniques that there are negatives one can rescue at scan time using a program such as Silverfast that are not so easily recoverable in Photoshop. Scan settings can matter substantially to what Photoshop can achieve thereafter. I'm not saying this is the case for all images. Like almost everything in this business, "it depends".........so that qualification and four bucks may buy you a latte, but not a copy of Silverfast.....................  

[jjj]

Thanks for that response, Mark. So does Silverfast actually affect how the scanner scans or is it simply very good at interpreting scanned files?

[Mark D Segal]

Thanks for that response, Mark. So does Silverfast actually affect how the scanner scans or is it simply very good at interpreting scanned files?

It sets the scanner controls which determine how the file gets scanned.

[Kumar]

jjj, there are some on eBay now, so you might want to look there. Shipping by JapanPost is not too expensive...

In VueScan I make a flat, washed out looking scan, which ensures that I have all the detail in the shadows, and then edit in Photoshop. I've made very good prints upto about 13x20, from a 120 negative. I've used only Fuji Reala for a very long time - no transparency film at all. The preset film curves in VueScan actually are quite good. I tried a demo of Silverfast long ago, but didn't quite get the hang of it.

Kumar

[Mark D Segal]

Silverfast is not the easiest program to learn. The documentation is not very good despite its volume, the interface has obscure aspects and there are overlapping controls. But it remains the most complete and effective scanning solution available especially for colour negative materials.

[Kumar]

Has anyone used ColorNeg http://www.c-f-systems.com/Plug-ins.html for scanning negatives? I downloaded a trial yesterday. The conversion is quite good, but I felt the saturation was pumped up too much. However, this is from a sample of only two scans. Can someone chime in?

Kumar