Best 35 mm scanner for under $1000?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jerry M.
  • Start date Start date
J

Jerry M.

[this message was originally posted in rec.photo.digital, but
comp.periphs.scanners was recommended istead]

Hi all,

I have a question that may have been asked a zillion times in the last
weeks, but I am really desperate and I truly need some human help. The
web or the usenet archives search tools are absolutely hopeless in my
quest, as every time I get loads of extremely wonderful results, each
one stating that "we are the best!", claims that have eternally and
continually been made since the stone age if not since the Big Bang for
nearly every piece of mud that has ever been produced.

My question is nevertheless very simple: I want to buy the best 35 mm
scanner available to date, for up to about $1000 (or, since I live in
the United Kingdom, about 600 pounds, or, since I also live in Europe as
well, about 850 euros). So, which one is that?

Thank you very very much for your kind and precious help.

JM
 
Jerry M. said:
[this message was originally posted in rec.photo.digital, but
comp.periphs.scanners was recommended istead]

Hi all,

I have a question that may have been asked a zillion times in the last
weeks, but I am really desperate and I truly need some human help. The
web or the usenet archives search tools are absolutely hopeless in my
quest, as every time I get loads of extremely wonderful results, each
one stating that "we are the best!", claims that have eternally and
continually been made since the stone age if not since the Big Bang for
nearly every piece of mud that has ever been produced.

My question is nevertheless very simple: I want to buy the best 35 mm
scanner available to date, for up to about $1000 (or, since I live in
the United Kingdom, about 600 pounds, or, since I also live in Europe as
well, about 850 euros). So, which one is that?
Click to expand...

My nomination is for the Konica-Minolta 5400 II which I'm about to spend my
own money to buy,

Norm
 
Jerry M. said:
[this message was originally posted in rec.photo.digital, but
comp.periphs.scanners was recommended istead]

Hi all,

I have a question that may have been asked a zillion times in the last
weeks, but I am really desperate and I truly need some human help. The
web or the usenet archives search tools are absolutely hopeless in my
quest, as every time I get loads of extremely wonderful results, each
one stating that "we are the best!", claims that have eternally and
continually been made since the stone age if not since the Big Bang for
nearly every piece of mud that has ever been produced.

My question is nevertheless very simple: I want to buy the best 35 mm
scanner available to date, for up to about $1000 (or, since I live in
the United Kingdom, about 600 pounds, or, since I also live in Europe as
well, about 850 euros). So, which one is that?

Thank you very very much for your kind and precious help.

JM
Click to expand...

I nominate the Nikon Coolscan V ED or the more expensive Nikon Coolscan 5000
ED.
The Coolscan 5000 ED is 979.95 USD at B&H in the USA.
The Coolscan V ED is 549.95 USD at B&H in the USA.
 
The Minolta 5400II has the electronics to rival the Nikon V, but one
look inside the case (2 screws, easy) will convince you that it should
not be considered.

I've owned two Minolta 5400II : Sad story.

One failed after a few scans and its replacement never lit up (Minolta
obviously does no testing before shipping). I looked inside and was
shocked to see the lightly constructed plastic gears that, while/if
they operate, drive the plastic film holder.

The Nikon weighs 3kg, the Minolta 1.5kg. This should be a clue.

While part of Nikon's extra weight is in the vented metal case (Minolta
is plastic), most of it appears to be inside (10 screws, I've never had
occasion to open). Nikon has multiple LED light source, which
presumably involves more transformer weight than does Minolta's single
LED. Nikon offers a "higher" level of Ice than does Minolta, but I
don't think that's a meaningful difference if one's film is good..that
adds weight because it's implimented with an extra light source Vs
Minolta.

The Nikon standard motorized film strip carrier (SA21) is excellent,
doesn't require lots of manual positioning, holds film flat (except for
end-of-strip frames...reportedly a problem for Minota too, but I can't
compare the relative badness since I never tested that with Minolta).
My B&W film is flat at end frames, so they scan well, but color neg
film seems always curled and as a result large prints (11X17) are soft
at one end...whereas B&W end frames are sharp everywhere as are mounted
slides.

Minolta formerly built excellent scanners, especially the original
5400. Their multi-format scanner was reportedly fine, as well.

IMO the best scanner deal on the market may be the old Minolta IV,
perfect for B&W (especially with added Scanhancer diffuser), ...but
there's no Ice. You may find new-old-stock for $250.

There's also the Nikon IV, which does have Ice, used and with excellent
warrenty for $350 from KEH in the US.

Scan quality: fairly critical 8.5X11 prints with defaults from Reala
with my first 5400II equaled those from my current Nikon V. The Minolta
died after a half dozen scans, replacement Minolta didn't function.
 
[Minolta vs Nikon]

Excellent contribution, that's exactly the kind of comments I'm after.

Thanks a lot.

JM
 
(Breaking with the habit I'll top-post this time... ;o) because it's a
message worth quoting in full.)

That's very interesting! I was (sort of) toying with the idea of
getting the Mark II for my Kodachromes but never got around to it. My
KC's all done now, anyway, so this is all academic, but...

It's a long shot, but before the Minolta died have you had a chance to
scan some Kodachromes?

I'm curious if the single white LED suffers from the same problems
Nikon's 3 distinct LEDs do (blue cast, absence of red, dark).

I downloaded Minolta's user guide PDF once and there's no mention of a
"Kodachrome mode" but that can be interpreted in two ways, of course:
Either Minolta doesn't need a special mode or they just didn't bother.

BTW, the plastic gears are really ridiculous! That explains the
reports of 5400s breaking down after only about a year of use. Still,
it seems extremely "lucky" to get two lemons in a row like that.

Don.
 
Back
Top