RIP Coolscan!
Old 04-17-2016   #1
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
RIP Coolscan!

Well my Nikon Coolscan V ED finally gave up today (with a little help!). Having a look at the prices of scanners Nikons are a bit pricey and considering they are not even supported anymore thought I would try using DSLR, its not too bad for a first quick try.
16fbpicScantest_01 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr
So I'm wondering should I-
a. Stick with DSLR and it may be ok with a bit more work.
b. Buy a secondhand Nikon.
c. Get another scanner suggestions please.

Cheers.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-17-2016   #2
mdarnton
Registered User
 
mdarnton is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,262
What did you use to do the one above, which I assume is a DSLR copy of a neg or slide? Camera? Lens? Anything else?

I've been very happy with camera scanning.
__________________
Thanks, but I'd rather just watch:
Mostly 35mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mdarnton
Large format: http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldarnton
What? You want digital, color, etc?: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradofear
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-17-2016   #3
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdarnton View Post
What did you use to do the one above, which I assume is a DSLR copy of a neg or slide? Camera? Lens? Anything else?

I've been very happy with camera scanning.
I used Canon 1dx 50mm 13mm extension tube (could do with a longer one bit of a crop) Hama cheap light box and durst glassless neg carrier Fujicolour 100 (expired) processed in tetenal chems. I think if I had a proper macro lens it might be quite good.
getting better
16fbpicd1dxscan_004 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr
Cheers.
wouldn't mind seeing some examples of what can be done with dslr.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-17-2016   #4
mdarnton
Registered User
 
mdarnton is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,262
Most of my 35mm flickr stuff is dslr scanned: http://flickr.com/mdarnton The most recent three are with my D7200 (4000x6000, roughly), the rest with D300 (2800x4200, roughly), and only one, the 4th, with a G4050 HP flatbed, just to see what it would do in its two-pass mode, compared with camera scanning.

I recently upgraded to a Nikon D7200 (24Mp, no anti-alias) and an El-Nikkor 63mm/2.8, with a bellows/slide duping rig, and the results are literally more than twice as good as I was getting with my D300 (12Mp plus AA) and 55mm/3.5 micro-Nikkor. But I was happy enough with the D300, which edged out flatbed scanners. Now I'm delighted. The latest (plastic mount version!) 63/2.8 Nikkor is supposedly one of the very best lenses out there for this job, along with the 75mm Rodagon-D lens which is harder to find and more money.

I don't do any color, though, so my things may not help you much.

You may get the wrong impression a bit, because the D300's resolution range is particularly vulnerable to grain aliasing, which makes "false grain", larger than the film's own grain. That's not grain sharpness you're looking at there. The D720 scans are, I think, real grain, resolved. . . or closer to it, anyway.

I would put it this way: if you are satisfied with the resolution level of your Canon DSLR, with a little care and the right lens you should be able to drag that much out of film, if it's there. Since my habitual Tri-X in D76 has less than my 24Mp DSLR, I'm completely happy with what I'm getting, and there's nothing more to get.
__________________
Thanks, but I'd rather just watch:
Mostly 35mm: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mdarnton
Large format: http://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldarnton
What? You want digital, color, etc?: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stradofear
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-17-2016   #5
Oren Grad
Registered User
 
Oren Grad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdarnton View Post
You may get the wrong impression a bit, because the D300's resolution range is particularly vulnerable to grain aliasing, which makes "false grain", larger than the film's own grain. That's not grain sharpness you're looking at there. The D720 scans are, I think, real grain, resolved. . . or closer to it, anyway.
The D7200 doesn't have enough resolution to image grain, nor do the Coolscan 5000 or 9000. All of them are generating "false grain". Probably need to approximately double the resolution of the Coolscans before one would be in the ballpark for faithful rendering of Tri-X, let alone anything finer-grained.

But I use a 9000 anyway. When it becomes unrepairable I'll be looking very hard at a high-MP DSLR setup to replace it. A drum scanner is way more than I want to mess with.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-17-2016   #6
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,497
Drum scanners are difficult and require a learning curve. You need to wet scan .

Keep in mind they are old and expensive with same issues as Coolscan.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #7
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
Seems the fault with my coolscan is the SA21, slide it in and the scanner does not recognise it, had a look on ebay and a replacement sa21 is almost as much as a plustek. But the scanner does still scan using slide feed ma21 so not a total loss bit of a pain putting negs into slide mounts!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #8
bonatto
looking out
 
bonatto's Avatar
 
bonatto is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 641
Hey Fraser, try getting in touch with Nikon UK, they serviced my V ED about a year ago.
__________________
website | flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #9
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonatto View Post
Hey Fraser, try getting in touch with Nikon UK, they serviced my V ED about a year ago.
o really i thought they had given up with scanners. i will give them a call.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #10
bonatto
looking out
 
bonatto's Avatar
 
bonatto is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 641
Here's the link for the page I did it through:

https://service.nikonrepair.eu/Repai...tomerDtls.aspx
__________________
website | flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #11
pomozwi
Registered User
 
pomozwi is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15
Hi Fraser, you could also consider the FH-3 filmholder which holds strip of 6 negs and goes into the MA-21 slot. Film advance between frames is manual but at least you won't have to cut film into individual frames and remount as slides - crazy.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #12
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonatto View Post
Here's the link for the page I did it through:

https://service.nikonrepair.eu/Repai...tomerDtls.aspx
cheers.........
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #13
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by pomozwi View Post
Hi Fraser, you could also consider the FH-3 filmholder which holds strip of 6 negs and goes into the MA-21 slot. Film advance between frames is manual but at least you won't have to cut film into individual frames and remount as slides - crazy.
never heard of that will have a wee look.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #14
Hannes
Registered User
 
Hannes is offline
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraser View Post
never heard of that will have a wee look.
You can try to get the FH-2 as alternative. It is cheaper than the FH-3 and also works fine.

I still use mine from LS 20 with LS4000 and MA-20

Hannes
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #15
giganova
Registered User
 
giganova is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,414
It's hard to beat a Plustek scanner at what they cost. With a resolution of up to 7200dpi, you get stellar results. My scans beat the best scans I ever got from a professional lab.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #16
Hannes
Registered User
 
Hannes is offline
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannes View Post
You can try to get the FH-2 as alternative. It is cheaper than the FH-3 and also works fine.
There is oneFH-2 from Italy right now on ebay ID 262385286374

Hannes
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #17
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 34
Posts: 1,070
I'm also planning on moving away from my V600 and Pakon scanner for scanning colors

Pretty impressed with the colors, resolution and DR that I'm getting with the M240 scanning rig (Canon FD 50mm 3.5 Macro lens and IPS Monitor as light source)
IMG_7180 by Earl Dieta, on Flickr

L1002505 by e Dieta, on Flickr

L1002544 by e Dieta, on Flickr

L1002522 by e Dieta, on Flickr

I've done color negative in the past with the A7 but might give it another try with the M240.
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #18
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
Thanks for the replies, managed to find a fh3 quite cheap on the big auction site, cheaper than buying a new scanner or a macro lens even if I only get another 6months/year fingers crossed from the scanner!
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #19
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
Its gone a bit old school, quite nice to go back to selecting straight from film rather than scanner previews and much quicker!
16fbpicslightbox_01 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-18-2016   #20
efinglada
Registered User
 
efinglada is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 70
Alex Ketzner, in Florida repairs Nikon scanners, you can contact him and see if it can be rapired

[email protected]

Last year I sent my Coolscan LS 4000 ED and is working again

If you were happy with your scanner, it might be worth it

Regards
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2016   #21
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,718
Well my coolscan V is as good as new, the power button had been playing up quite difficult to turn on and sometimes turning off by itself! Bought a cheap IV that was described as powering on but nothing else took a risk hoping the power unit was the same, seems it is, quick swap and works fine. But what makes it even better thought I would try the sa21 that had stopped working thats working fine now as well now.
Might even buy vuescan now so I can finally update my mac and dump Nikon scan!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2016   #22
RichardPhoto
Registered User
 
RichardPhoto is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 54
I had a Coolscan V - they're excellent scanners.

In terms of alternatives, I've read that the Reflecta RPS 10m is very good. It's about the same price as a used Coolscan V though. I guess you get the reassurance of new+warranty though. They don't look as user friendly as the coolscan though.

If I was to go back to 35mm film I would a) scan with mirrorless camera if I wasn't shooting a lot, or, b) buy another Coolscan V.

From all the research I did the better technical option is the scanning with a camera route. I'm not sure if I'd like to bother with that if I was producing any sort of large volume of film. One of the reasons I walked away from film is that I was getting annoyed by the time sink that is scanning...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-03-2016   #23
wizofz2k
Registered User
 
wizofz2k is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 40
Having good results with a Plustek Opticfilm120.
Incredibly expensive because of the silly forced purchase of the Silverfast scanner software ($500 of itself!).
But with vuescan it's a much better and faster scanner.
I find vuescan works really well with this one for colour negative film.
For slide film nothing compares with Nikonscan and the Coolscan 9000, mostly because of its DEE mode to resolve the increased contrast.
If vuescan had a similar setting, the Opticfilm120 would be as good for slide film...
__________________
Cheers
Nuno Souto
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2016   #24
kanzlr
Hexaneur
 
kanzlr's Avatar
 
kanzlr is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Vienna (Austria)
Age: 38
Posts: 1,002
Love my OpticFilm 120 too
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2016   #25
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 573
I cannot recommend the Primefilm XA enough.

AUTOFOCUS for goodness sakes. And for me personally the batch scanning works great.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-04-2016   #26
Dguebey
Registered User
 
Dguebey is offline
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 108
I have the Coolscan V ED always usable for slides.
Power plug sometimes have problem.
Like anybody I suffered the unavoidable problem of SA-21 programmed death.
There is a remedy, if it is your case, see here :
http://janburke.de/index.php/compone...21-film-feeder
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:33.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.