Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

I'm perhaps looking for a true medium format film scanner that I could
afford. It seems I just might able to buy a second-hand Minolta Scan
Multi Pro or Nikon Coolscan 8000 unit from eBay or elsewhere. I've
been trying to come up with a preference between these two units on
information I found on the web. Are there any updates to what I have
gathered he

Minolta Scan Multi Pro:
+ Glass holder is included
+ I like Minolta Scan software (experience from my Scan Elite 5400 II)
+ Slide scanning quality is said to be damn good
- There are reports of problems scanning negatives: excessive grain
and clipped highlights. The "scanhancer" apparently solves the
first problem, what about the other? I scan B&W and color
negatives a lot, also slides.
- Digital ICE, which I intend to use a lot, causes artifacts in sharp edges

Nikon Coolscan 8000:
- Banding issue when not scanning at the slow setting
- Glass holder an expensive option
+ No reported problems with scanning negatives
+ No reported problems with ICE
+ For some reason I trust Nikon build quality more but have no
actual data to justify this opinion


Both have one common (potential) problem: Minolta doesn't make
scanners anymore at all. Nikon doesn't make the Coolscan 8000 anymore,
it's replaced by the Coolscan 9000. Will service be a problem? Will my
scanner turn into expensive junk when something breaks inside?

I'm coming from an Epson V700 + Scan Elite 5400 II combination, I plan
on selling both when I have acquired the true MF film scanner. My
"dream scanner" would be one that was as convenient and produces
as good results as the Scan Elite 5400 II, but for medium format.
This includes convenience of handling film with the scanner and
the magically wonderful way ICE is implemented on the 5400II.

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

"Toni Nikkanen" wrote:
SNIP

My advice would be to save your pennies (put away US$100 a month plus
whatever you have now) and get a Nikon 9000 a year from now.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

Be careful with the Minolta as new software wont be readily available
from Minolta....(Vuescan will work as well as a few other 3rd party
solutions)....that being said...the Minolta is an AMAZING scanner....I
used the 5400 for my 35mm and rented a Minolta Pro for my medium format
scans and they are VERY good....amazing in fact.

JR

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

JR writes:

Be careful with the Minolta as new software wont be readily available
from Minolta....(Vuescan will work as well as a few other 3rd party
solutions)....that being said...the Minolta is an AMAZING scanner....I
used the 5400 for my 35mm and rented a Minolta Pro for my medium format
scans and they are VERY good....amazing in fact.

Yes I'd expect amazing scans after my experiences with the 5400II, but
what about the issue with negative films? Is there a solution? Or does
the problem even exist?

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

In article ,
Toni Nikkanen wrote:

JR writes:

Be careful with the Minolta as new software wont be readily available
from Minolta....(Vuescan will work as well as a few other 3rd party
solutions)....that being said...the Minolta is an AMAZING scanner....I
used the 5400 for my 35mm and rented a Minolta Pro for my medium format
scans and they are VERY good....amazing in fact.

Yes I'd expect amazing scans after my experiences with the 5400II, but
what about the issue with negative films? Is there a solution? Or does
the problem even exist?

I would imagine it scans negatives great....I used all positove film
when I used it....rent one and see if it does what you want....

JR

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

"Toni Nikkanen" wrote in message
...

I'm perhaps looking for a true medium format film scanner that I could
afford. It seems I just might able to buy a second-hand Minolta Scan
Multi Pro or Nikon Coolscan 8000 unit from eBay or elsewhere. I've
been trying to come up with a preference between these two units on
information I found on the web. Are there any updates to what I have
gathered he

Minolta Scan Multi Pro:
+ Glass holder is included
+ I like Minolta Scan software (experience from my Scan Elite 5400
II)
+ Slide scanning quality is said to be damn good
- There are reports of problems scanning negatives: excessive grain
and clipped highlights. The "scanhancer" apparently solves the
first problem, what about the other? I scan B&W and color
negatives a lot, also slides.
- Digital ICE, which I intend to use a lot, causes artifacts in
sharp edges

Nikon Coolscan 8000:
- Banding issue when not scanning at the slow setting
- Glass holder an expensive option
+ No reported problems with scanning negatives
+ No reported problems with ICE
+ For some reason I trust Nikon build quality more but have no
actual data to justify this opinion


Both have one common (potential) problem: Minolta doesn't make
scanners anymore at all. Nikon doesn't make the Coolscan 8000 anymore,
it's replaced by the Coolscan 9000. Will service be a problem? Will my
scanner turn into expensive junk when something breaks inside?

I'm coming from an Epson V700 + Scan Elite 5400 II combination, I plan
on selling both when I have acquired the true MF film scanner. My
"dream scanner" would be one that was as convenient and produces
as good results as the Scan Elite 5400 II, but for medium format.
This includes convenience of handling film with the scanner and
the magically wonderful way ICE is implemented on the 5400II.





Just get the Nikon--they have no real competitor in their price range...

--
www.mattclara.com

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

On Sep 5, 9:50 pm, Toni Nikkanen wrote:
JR writes:
Be careful with the Minolta as new software wont be readily available
from Minolta....(Vuescan will work as well as a few other 3rd party
solutions)....that being said...the Minolta is an AMAZING scanner....I
used the 5400 for my 35mm and rented a Minolta Pro for my medium format
scans and they are VERY good....amazing in fact.

Yes I'd expect amazing scans after my experiences with the 5400II, but
what about the issue with negative films? Is there a solution? Or does
the problem even exist?

I have had some neg films scanned on a coolscan 9000 and the grain was
a very serious issue.

For the Minolta look he http://www.scanhancer.com/index.php?art=15&men=15.
I have never used this and am in no way affiliated by the company that
makes it!

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

MLIDDELL wrote:

I have had some neg films scanned on a coolscan 9000 and the grain was
a very serious issue.

Uhm... The grain is in the film, right?
So not a scanner issue (except that the thing was good enough to show the
grain)?
;-)

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

MLIDDELL writes:

For the Minolta look he http://www.scanhancer.com/index.php?art=15&men=15.
I have never used this and am in no way affiliated by the company that
makes it!

Yes, I understand the Scanhancer fixes the graininess issue but what
about the clipped shadows and highlights issue described he
http://web.tiscali.it/saphoto/body_scanimages2.html

Also there is a vague reference he
http://www.photographical.net/minolta_pro.html

"[Update 26.06.02]
A group of Minolta Pro users are quite concerned about the problems with scanning negatives. They have made a site describing the problems:
? http://www.visicon.se/multipro/ "

....that link no longer works.


Now googling further I found some hints that "the negative problem"
may have been addressed in a newer Minolta scan software release and that
it was really only a software problem anyway, so using vuescan or silverfast
might be the complete solution:
http://www.photographical.net/silverfast_ai_6.html




...to summarize my ramblings, I will chalk this up as "there is no
negative problem" and I also found that the "ICE problem" doesn't happen
with Vuescan (at least).

While the original advice of buying a new Nikon 9000 when I have gathered
the money is probably the best choice (I could have the money tonight if I wanted
to; I have a mortgage :) it is also a question of just how much spending I can
justify for the silly obsession of scanning film :)

Multi Pro or Coolscan 8000?
 

"Q.G. de Bakker" writes:

Uhm... The grain is in the film, right?
So not a scanner issue (except that the thing was good enough to show the
grain)?
;-)

Actually "grain aliasing" can greatly exaggerate graininess on a film,
far beyond what a traditional wet print would show. So it can be a
scanner issue as well.