Coolscan 9000 vs Minolta Dimage Scan Multi F-3000

[Edi]

Hello guys,

I'm considering buying a coolscan 9000 or a minolta dimage scan multi . do any of you have experience with them are they way better than an epson flat bed scanner? would they run on a today's OS system? anything info would help. thanks

 

[Kodachromeguy]

OK, this is going to be complicated. I use a Minolta Scan Multi F-3000 to scan medium format negatives (color and mono). I operate it with an old Dell Windows 7 32-bit computer with a SCSI card. The Dell is not networked or connected to the web at all; its only purpose is to run this scanner and a similar-vintage Epson 3200 Photo flat-bed scanner.

Getting the Minolta scanner to run was a bit of a chore. First, I had to install the SCSI card and install drivers. That was OK. Then I had to load scanner drivers, which may have loaded automatically when I tested VueScan software. The original Minolta software worked but was limited in its options and did not scale to a modern monitor. Finally I bought Silverfast Ai during a Christmas sale, when the price was a bit better. The Silverfast runs well and has numerous options, such as multi-scan, and has profiles for many common film types (common in the 1990s, that is).

I could never get VueScan to work properly. That was probably my error, but I gave up. Silverfast loaded immediately and worked perfectly from the start.

The Minolta Scan-Multi definitely gets more data and dynamic range out of a negative than the Epson 3200 flat bed. I do not have experience with the latest Epson scanners.

A hint: scan WITH NO sharpening. Do that later with another software package, depending on your needs.

A limitation: the Silverfast for the Minolta does not have an option to add EXIF information to your scans. Therefore, you need another package to add description, your name, copyright, dates, location, geographic coordinates, etc., etc.

Here is a recent article with examples of 120 film scans.

Here is an example with scanning Fomapan 100 film.

Cheers and good luck with the adventure!

 

[Les Sarile]

Been using the Nikon Coolscan 9000 for a number of years now with Nikonscan on a standalone PC running Windows Vista as my preference. Prior to that I originally bought the Coolscan 5000 when it was first released and thought I would just use the Epson V700 for the limited medium format film I shot. But after getting the quality out of my 35mm with the CS5000, it didn't make sense to me to downgrade my scans from medium format so that's when I bought the CS9000. Not only do the Coolscans have a quality advantage in terms of color, contrast sharpness and actual detail resolved, but the workflow is far simpler and much faster too. Specially when you turn on dust and scratch removal (ICE) as all other scanners will more then double the scan time per frame while the Coolscans + Nikonscan only takes a very small percentage longer.

I've never used the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi F-3000 but from what I can find online, it is only 2820dpi with 35mm film and even less with medium format at 1280dpi. Also, it doesn't seem to have ICE? If you are only planning to scan true b&w film then ICE is not an advantage as it doesn't work on those types of film.

 

[Edi]

OK, this is going to be complicated. I use a Minolta Scan Multi F-3000 to scan medium format negatives (color and mono). I operate it with an old Dell Windows 7 32-bit computer with a SCSI card. The Dell is not networked or connected to the web at all; its only purpose is to run this scanner and a similar-vintage Epson 3200 Photo flat-bed scanner.

Getting the Minolta scanner to run was a bit of a chore. First, I had to install the SCSI card and install drivers. That was OK. Then I had to load scanner drivers, which may have loaded automatically when I tested VueScan software. The original Minolta software worked but was limited in its options and did not scale to a modern monitor. Finally I bought Silverfast Ai during a Christmas sale, when the price was a bit better. The Silverfast runs well and has numerous options, such as multi-scan, and has profiles for many common film types (common in the 1990s, that is).

I could never get VueScan to work properly. That was probably my error, but I gave up. Silverfast loaded immediately and worked perfectly from the start.

The Minolta Scan-Multi definitely gets more data and dynamic range out of a negative than the Epson 3200 flat bed. I do not have experience with the latest Epson scanners.

A hint: scan WITH NO sharpening. Do that later with another software package, depending on your needs.

A limitation: the Silverfast for the Minolta does not have an option to add EXIF information to your scans. Therefore, you need another package to add description, your name, copyright, dates, location, geographic coordinates, etc., etc.

Here is a recent article with examples of 120 film scans.

Here is an example with scanning Fomapan 100 film.

Cheers and good luck with the adventure!

thank you. I am leaning to the Minolta Scan Multi F3000 just because you can get one cheaper than the coolscan which is considerably pricey.

I was trying to find reviews but mostly are for the Scan Multi Pro so I'm not sure on how much difference is between those two models.

 

[Edi]

Been using the Nikon Coolscan 9000 for a number of years now with Nikonscan on a standalone PC running Windows Vista as my preference. Prior to that I originally bought the Coolscan 5000 when it was first released and thought I would just use the Epson V700 for the limited medium format film I shot. But after getting the quality out of my 35mm with the CS5000, it didn't make sense to me to downgrade my scans from medium format so that's when I bought the CS9000. Not only do the Coolscans have a quality advantage in terms of color, contrast sharpness and actual detail resolved, but the workflow is far simpler and much faster too. Specially when you turn on dust and scratch removal (ICE) as all other scanners will more then double the scan time per frame while the Coolscans + Nikonscan only takes a very small percentage longer.

I've never used the Minolta Dimage Scan Multi F-3000 but from what I can find online, it is only 2820dpi with 35mm film and even less with medium format at 1280dpi. Also, it doesn't seem to have ICE? If you are only planning to scan true b&w film then ICE is not an advantage as it doesn't work on those types of film.

Thank you!! you seem to be right about the scan resolution, im considering also because its cheaper. I mostly shoot color medium format (all 6x45,6,7 & 9) but if its a lot of difference between the coolscan vs the minolta i would start leaning more to the coolscan

 

[Kodachromeguy]

from what I can find online, it is only 2820dpi with 35mm film and even less with medium format at 1280dpi.

WRONG. The Scan Multi will scan a 6×9 at 2820 and a 6×6 or smaller at 5640. I do not know what the true optical resolution is.

 

[Les Sarile]

WRONG. The Scan Multi will scan a 6×9 at 2820 and a 6×6 or smaller at 5640. I do not know what the true optical resolution is.

Apparently there are many variations of "Minolta Dimage Scan Multi". This site states "2820 dpi resolution (32.5 meg file from 35mm neg), 1128 dpi for medium-format scans" -> https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DSM/DSMA.HTM

 

[Les Sarile]

Thank you!! you seem to be right about the scan resolution, im considering also because its cheaper. I mostly shoot color medium format (all 6x45,6,7 & 9) but if its a lot of difference between the coolscan vs the minolta i would start leaning more to the coolscan

Well the dpi difference will only be evident depending on how much care you take in shooting, the lenses used and how big a print you make or how much magnification you review on-screen.

 

[MattKing]

WRONG. The Scan Multi will scan a 6×9 at 2820 and a 6×6 or smaller at 5640. I do not know what the true optical resolution is.

It depends on which version you have. The Scan Multi is limited to 1280 ppi for medium format film. The Scan Multi II ups that to 2820 ppi for medium format. However, that is actually accomplished through software, because the Scan Multi has that mechanical capability. As Konica Minolta is out of the business, you can't buy that upgrade from them. There are resources on the net where people have reversed engineered the software upgrade, but it isn't a matter of an "out of the box" solution.
You need a computer with an SCSI interface - SCSI to USB or Firewire adapters aren't reliable with the scanner (although a very few have had some success).
You also need to be able to use the Konica Minolta software in order to lock the transport for shipping. If the vendor can't offer that service, don't buy the scanner. It is a bit challenging to get the Konica Minolta software to work with Windows 7, but there are driver modifications on the internet that work. I stopped using my scanner before switching to Windows 10.
I bought a Scan Multi many years ago from someone who didn't know about locking the transport, and it cost $600.00 CDN to repair the damage incurred in shipping. I don't know if it would still be possible to do that. I did end up with a number of years of good service from the scanner.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

I cannot comment on different versions of the Scan Multi. I have two (2) Scan Multi F3000 bodies, and both will scan at 2820 via Silverfast Ai and SCSI interface. I do it whenever I finish and develop a roll of 120 film. One unit has a carriage that sometimes bogs down, so one day it may enter failure mode.

 

[Les Sarile]

I cannot comment on different versions of the Scan Multi. I have two (2) Scan Multi F3000 bodies, and both will scan at 2820 via Silverfast Ai and SCSI interface. I do it whenever I finish and develop a roll of 120 film. One unit has a carriage that sometimes bogs down, so one day it may enter failure mode.

Glad you clarified that Scan Multi II is the F3000. I found an ebay listing with pics showing the model nameplate that also provided the Konica Minolta site for the scanner specs but doesn't list F3000. Was confusing to me. So the Konica site itself for this scanner states "2820dpi: 35mm, APS, and 16mm film 1128dpi: Medium format and TEM film " in the spec sheet found at -> https://www.konicaminoltasupport.com/index.php?id=1254&L=2%

BTW, if you are strictly a "Kodachrome" guy, you may have been aware that Nikonscan+Coolscan V, 5000 & 9000 ICE are the best when applied to Kodachrome.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Glad you clarified that Scan Multi II is the F3000.

WRONG! Les, let it go. You stated that you don't own a Minolta. Write about the scanner that you use. As I wrote above, I HAVE A SCAN MULTI F-3000. The label on the machine clearly states that. The Scan Multi II is model F-3100, a different machine. I regularly scan 6x6 frames at 2820 dpi on both of my F-3000 units. I clearly stated that above. The gent who asked the original question wants real and useful information.

 

[MattKing]

The software for your F-3000 has the software upgrade to make the package an F- 3100. That is what permits the medium format scans to work at the higher resolution.
It is an upgrade to the driver, and directly affects how the Konica-Minolta software works.
There are some complex work-arounds that will let someone use the upgraded driver with Vuescan, rather than the driver Vuescan substitutes, if a user wishes to proceed that way.

 

[Edi]

Apparently there are many variations of "Minolta Dimage Scan Multi". This site states "2820 dpi resolution (32.5 meg file from 35mm neg), 1128 dpi for medium-format scans" -> https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DSM/DSMA.HTM

yes, I've seen that there's three versions . Scan Multi , Scan Multi II (which seems that it only has a software update) and Scan Multi Pro. Right now I'm been offered the Scan Multi and I'm not sure how easy would be to get the software update these days.

 

[Les Sarile]

WRONG! Les, let it go. You stated that you don't own a Minolta. White about the scanner that you use. As I wrote above, I HAVE A SCAN MULTI F-3000. The label on the machine clearly states that. The Scan Multi II is model F-3100, a different machine. I regularly scan 6x6 frames at 2820 dpi on both of my F-3000 units. I clearly stated that above. The gent who asked the original question wants real and useful information.

View attachment 267855 View attachment 267856 View attachment 267857 View attachment 267858

The resolution specs listed on the mfg website for the Multi I and your Multi seem to be as I already listed -> https://www.konicaminoltasupport.com/index.php?id=3088&L=2641

Since I nor the OP and possibly others who may be interested, don't have this scanner and you do, you can clarify this discrepancy.

 

[Edi]

WRONG! Les, let it go. You stated that you don't own a Minolta. Write about the scanner that you use. As I wrote above, I HAVE A SCAN MULTI F-3000. The label on the machine clearly states that. The Scan Multi II is model F-3100, a different machine. I regularly scan 6x6 frames at 2820 dpi on both of my F-3000 units. I clearly stated that above. The gent who asked the original question wants real and useful information.

View attachment 267855 View attachment 267856 View attachment 267857 View attachment 267858

Thank you for sharing, It seems that you are the only one currently using the scanner so your expertise is greatly appreciated.

 

[Edi]

The software for your F-3000 has the software upgrade to make the package an F- 3100. That is what permits the medium format scans to work at the higher resolution.
It is an upgrade to the driver, and directly affects how the Konica-Minolta software works.
There are some complex work-arounds that will let someone use the upgraded driver with Vuescan, rather than the driver Vuescan substitutes, if a user wishes to proceed that way.

Thank you. The question is how easy would be to do this install these days

 

[Les Sarile]

It depends on which version you have. The Scan Multi is limited to 1280 ppi for medium format film. The Scan Multi II ups that to 2820 ppi for medium format. However, that is actually accomplished through software, because the Scan Multi has that mechanical capability. As Konica Minolta is out of the business, you can't buy that upgrade from them. There are resources on the net where people have reversed engineered the software upgrade, but it isn't a matter of an "out of the box" solution.
You need a computer with an SCSI interface - SCSI to USB or Firewire adapters aren't reliable with the scanner (although a very few have had some success).
You also need to be able to use the Konica Minolta software in order to lock the transport for shipping. If the vendor can't offer that service, don't buy the scanner. It is a bit challenging to get the Konica Minolta software to work with Windows 7, but there are driver modifications on the internet that work. I stopped using my scanner before switching to Windows 10.
I bought a Scan Multi many years ago from someone who didn't know about locking the transport, and it cost $600.00 CDN to repair the damage incurred in shipping. I don't know if it would still be possible to do that. I did end up with a number of years of good service from the scanner.

There are definitely some resourceful people out there!
Bummer about the failure and cost of repair though. Definitely a potential issye with used equipment!

 

[MattKing]

Thank you. The question is how easy would be to do this install these days

The update has a serial number embedded in it. In days gone by Konica Minolta used serial number verification to prevent people from sharing bootlegged copies of the upgrade - I expect that if the serial number wasn't registered to you, then what were then regular updates from the manufacturer wouldn't work.
Here is a 10+ year old Photo-net thread with a serial number included, and some useful discussion: https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/minolta-dimage-scan-multi-multi-ii-tips-and-tricks.411636/

 

[Edi]

The update has a serial number embedded in it. In days gone by Konica Minolta used serial number verification to prevent people from sharing bootlegged copies of the upgrade - I expect that if the serial number wasn't registered to you, then what were then regular updates from the manufacturer wouldn't work.
Here is a 10+ year old Photo-net thread with a serial number included, and some useful discussion: https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/minolta-dimage-scan-multi-multi-ii-tips-and-tricks.411636/

thanks Matt !! very helpful

 

[dxqcanada]

The SCSI interface is the biggest roadblock.
I got my Scan Multi II (F-3100) with a SCSI to Firewire adapter (that is no longer made), so I can still connect it to my MacBook.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

The update has a serial number embedded in it. In days gone by Konica Minolta used serial number verification to prevent people from sharing bootlegged copies of the upgrade - I expect that if the serial number wasn't registered to you, then what were then regular updates from the manufacturer wouldn't work.
Here is a 10+ year old Photo-net thread with a serial number included, and some useful discussion: https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/minolta-dimage-scan-multi-multi-ii-tips-and-tricks.411636/

I used the same serial number as the one that was listed in the old photo.net thread: DS-2AA15982-M27EFE3F

 

[mtjade2007]

I used the same serial number as the one that was listed in the old photo.net thread: DS-2AA15982-M27EFE3F

I own two Minolta Multi-I (F3000). I paid a fortune for the first one about a year before the F-3100 came out. When the f-3100 came out Minolta made it clear that the F3100 and F-3000 were identical in the hardware. The F-3100 got a new version of the software which enabled quadruple resolution scanning for medium format. How was it achieved if the hardware was the same as the F-3000? Well, the F-3100 scans in the scanning direction with twice the number of steps. But an interpolation of pixels is done in software in the other axis. So F-3100 can indeed scan at a higher resolution with a trick applied, not a true 4x resolution but the resulted scan is indeed a higher resolution scan that will enable you a larger print.

Minolta did offer a upgrade path for F-3000 users to make their F-3000 a F-3100 by paying a fee to download and install the newer version of the scanning software. They will give a serial number which is needed when installing the scanning software. So if you want to convert your F-3000 to F-3100 just download and install the newer version of the scanning software and enter the serial number. The F-3000 then is a F-3100 afterwards, not a slight difference from the F-3100. Yes, I believe the serial number is out on the internet. I believe yours is one of them and should work just fine. Both my F-3000s are now F-3100s. I have archived the scanner software and the serial number and will never worry about where to find them on the web.

That said, I still scan my 6x7 films at 1280 dpi most of the time. By scanning at 4x it would only take a lot more time and a lot more storage space on my PC. Despite I scan at 1280 dpi I can still print 13x19 on my inkjet printer without losing image quality at all. Minolta Scan Multi is a great scanner. Despite that Minolta scanners do not have ICE hardware I develop my own negatives and if I am careful to dry my films in a dustless (ideally) room there are very few dust issues on my scan. I usually scan without applying GEM/ROC either. I did not feel need of them if my negs are properly processed.

 

[Rogier van der Heide]

WRONG. The Scan Multi will scan a 6×9 at 2820 and a 6×6 or smaller at 5640. I do not know what the true optical resolution is.

I do know this is a very old comment but actually the scan resolution of the Dimage Multi F3000 / F3100 is 1128 dpi when scanning 6x6, 6x7, 6x8 of 6x9 materials.
That higher resolution you mention must belong to he Multi Pro, but that is not the scanner that was discussed here.

 

[Radost]

For 35 it is hard to beat Pacific Image XAS. Autofocus and great quality. I like some scans better than Noritsu and frontier. I have the 3 slide fuji calibration and silver fast.
For 120 I have Pacific Image 120 Pro. It does a great job. "flat negatives for 120 required since it does not have autofocus"

And honestly, I want to support a company that still produces film scanners. Buying Coolscans that break and have zero serviceability does not do any good to the community.
Is Nikon scanning better than PI? For 135 i would say no. Not by much. For 120?? Maybe if you pixel peep.
At the end of the day I want my money to go to companies that are dedicated to the film community.