Jobo Colorstar 2000 vs 3000

[L Gebhardt]

I am looking for a good color meter and have an old Jobo product catalog that describes the Color Star 3000 and 6000. I have seen the Colorstar 2000 show up on ebay a few times, but I know nothing about it's features. The Colorstar 3000 looks like it would work well for me. What is missing in the 2000 model? Does anyone have an manual or fact sheet for the 2000 they could scan for me?

 

[Nick Zentena]

You can read the 3000 manual here:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/nick_zentena/colorstar3000.html

I don't remember the difference between the 2000 and 3000 but I remember a general consenus that the 3000 was a step above. Considering the 3000 is often pretty cheap on the used market I'm not sure it makes sense to consider anything older. The 3000 is so cheap I've bought backups.

 

[edz]

I am looking for a good color meter and have an old Jobo product catalog that describes the Color Star 3000 and 6000. I have seen the Colorstar 2000 show up on ebay a few times, but I know nothing about it's features. The Colorstar 3000 looks like it would work well for me. What is missing in the 2000 model? Does anyone have an manual or fact sheet for the 2000 they could scan for me?

The Colorstar 2000 has over the 3000:
- a really nice turn dial (the faster one turns it the faster the numbers go up, resp. down)
- a more refined color star (more LEDs)

The Colorstar 3000 has over the 2000:
- more digital memory (the 2000 has memory via plug-in pots).
- auto calibration (master channel)
- smaller footprint (and later models also got a smaller probe)
- can read directly in logD
- can read room temperature
- multiple measurement points and averaging (the 2000 is calibrated to a single point).

They are both really good. As a timer the 2000 is better but as an analyzer the 3000 is much more convienient. The auto-calibration feature for tracking colour chemistry (of relevance to those using manual processors such as Novas) and the multi-point averaging (nice for B&W) are quite nice to have features that make up for what Lici removed from the 2000. Then again.. with a roller transport RA-4 given that one tends to calibrate to a skin tone the 2000 might have a slight edge..

 

[Ed Sukach]

You can read the 3000 manual here:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/nick_zentena/colorstar3000.html

I don't remember the difference between the 2000 and 3000 but I remember a general consenus that the 3000 was a step above. Considering the 3000 is often pretty cheap on the used market I'm not sure it makes sense to consider anything older. The 3000 is so cheap I've bought backups.

This is *MOST* interesting!!!

Obviously there have been changes to the ColorStar 3000 - I skimmed over the manual linked here. Preliminarily, I didn't see anything of MAJOR concern, but I've printed the new manual, and I'll compare it to the old one.

Thanks, Nick!!

 

[Nick Zentena]

I think that manual is for the late model 8 channel version. I've also got an older 8 channel. The only hardware difference is the cable that plugs the enlarger into. I've also got a 100 channel model. But no manual for the 100 channel. The 100 channel only seems to have changed the number of channels when compared to the late model 8 channel.

 

[Nige]

I have a photocopy of a photocopy of a photocopy of a 2000 manual. Probably unscanable... well I could scan it, but you wouldn't be able to read it Could photocopy again and snail mail it.

I use mine for B&W and have tried once doing RA4 in room temp trays. I didn't get on top of it in that one session!

 

[edz]

I think that manual is for the late model 8 channel version. I've also got an older 8 channel.

What have you found the difference. I'm only really familiar with the change during the 3000 run from a longish probe (as used in the 2000 and 1000 models) to a smaller square one (internally using newer, smaller Japanese sensors which rolled over into the Spectrocam) and, of course, the final addition later (to counter Jobo's Colorline) of more memory. I've found, interestingly, some subtle differences between some functions and handbook but I suspect that this was due to the typical differences (in nearly all products) between handbook (documentation) and production. If I'm not mistaken (and recall correctly) most of the differences were in the B&W features (which made usage less consistent between B&W and colour and thus made the handbook even more important in the area where it was least or incorrectly documented).

 

[Nick Zentena]

I only use the 100 channel model really. I bought the other two to get the probes. My first one had a bum probe and it was cheaper to buy a whole unit then a replacement probe. Then I found a deal on the third one and figured a spare probe wouldn't hurt. All three together cost about 1/2 of what a replacement probe would cost.

The only hardware differences I see is how the enlarger plugs in. I almost busted one of them because it's different then the other two and I was too stupid to spend the ten seconds reading the manual before trying to put it together.

Supposedly the manuals are different because Jobo kept redoing them hoping to make them easier to understand. I remember somebody from Jobo USA mentioning that.

 

[Christopher Nisperos]

The Colorstar 2000 has over the 3000:
- a really nice turn dial (the faster one turns it the faster the numbers go up, resp. down)
- a more refined color star (more LEDs)

The Colorstar 3000 has over the 2000:
- more digital memory (the 2000 has memory via plug-in pots).
- auto calibration (master channel)
- smaller footprint (and later models also got a smaller probe)
- can read directly in logD
- can read room temperature
- multiple measurement points and averaging (the 2000 is calibrated to a single point).

They are both really good. As a timer the 2000 is better but as an analyzer the 3000 is much more convienient. The auto-calibration feature for tracking colour chemistry (of relevance to those using manual processors such as Novas) and the multi-point averaging (nice for B&W) are quite nice to have features that make up for what Lici removed from the 2000. Then again.. with a roller transport RA-4 given that one tends to calibrate to a skin tone the 2000 might have a slight edge..

As former export manager for Lici Colorstar, I agree 100% with Edz (please save this post ... it may be the only time ever that he and I agree. (relax edz.. just a joke).

In fact, being mainly a black & white user myself (plus, I was there "post Colorstar 2000"), better to count on Edz —or other experienced users— for more information on the Colorstar 3000 rather than I, but I can tell you that it is extremely easy to use and very precise. Later models have 99 channels, early ones, eight channels. The instruction manual can be a little bit convoluted in places, but nothing insurmountable. Beyond that, it's a brilliant machine which can also save a lot of paper (color or black & white).

BE VERY CAREFUL WITH THE PROBE CABLE! It's the only fairly sensitive part of the analyser .. Do NOT kink it or wind it too tightly, and you'll probably
have many years of good use (unless your darkroom is a humid cave!).

By the way ... for black & white printers, the little known Lici Varimatic (sort of a b&w version of the Colorstar) is also a fantastic timer/analyser, incorporating many of the same features Edz mentioned for the Colorstar 3000 including autocalibration and thermometer (the correct temperature is important for accurate functioning of the probe).

The miniscule filter pile in the probes on these machines were hand assembled by experienced technicians of the Dutch manufacturer, and each analyser is specifically calibrated to its particular probe. The probe is fact the secret to the success and accuracy of the Colorstar machines, which are a product of the genius of the company's founder, Harmen Broesma -- an expert in color spectral sensitivity. In short, this thang ain't "made by Mattel".

Back to you, Edz.

 

[L Gebhardt]

Thanks for all the info so far. I still don't know if I should buy a 2000 which comes up much more frequently, or wait for the 3000. Both would probably work for me, but the 3000 whould be ideal.

Anyone know of a good 3000 for sale?

 

[L Gebhardt]

I found a Colorstar 3000 on ebay and bought it. It is an older model with the bigger probe. The manual is also more primitive than the one referenced above.

I put it to use this weekend and had good luck matching colors with it. I did have trouble with it not being sensitive enough to measure some snow in sun (dense part of the neg). This only required an 11 second exposure so it doesn't seem like it should be a problem. I got around it by flipping the brightness lever from low to high to take the reading (and then did the same thing to match on the other negative).

I also had trouble measuring the density of the gray strip to calibrate it. Do any of you have this problem with the probe not seeming very sensitive?

 

[Nick Zentena]

The only time I've had problems was with some REALLY dense cross-processed negatives. Lets just see they were so thick they'd stop a truck. All I do in that case is analyze wide open then when I stop down I adjust the time to what it should be. So if it reads 2seconds at F/2.8 I'll manually set it to 8 seconds at F/5.6 or whatever things work out to.

Not sure which point you're having trouble with the grey strip. Is this analyzing the negative? Or reading the test strip? I can't see how you'd have problems with the test strip.

 

[hka]

I found a Colorstar 3000 on ebay and bought it. It is an older model with the bigger probe. The manual is also more primitive than the one referenced above.

I put it to use this weekend and had good luck matching colors with it. I did have trouble with it not being sensitive enough to measure some snow in sun (dense part of the neg). This only required an 11 second exposure so it doesn't seem like it should be a problem. I got around it by flipping the brightness lever from low to high to take the reading (and then did the same thing to match on the other negative).

I also had trouble measuring the density of the gray strip to calibrate it. Do any of you have this problem with the probe not seeming very sensitive?

Look at this article from Frances Schultz it gives you a good explanation of how to work with the Colorstar 3000. http://www.xs4all.nl/~colors/info/articles.html

 

[L Gebhardt]

The only time I've had problems was with some REALLY dense cross-processed negatives. Lets just see they were so thick they'd stop a truck. All I do in that case is analyze wide open then when I stop down I adjust the time to what it should be. So if it reads 2seconds at F/2.8 I'll manually set it to 8 seconds at F/5.6 or whatever things work out to.

Not sure which point you're having trouble with the grey strip. Is this analyzing the negative? Or reading the test strip? I can't see how you'd have problems with the test strip.

Nick, that is effectively how I handled the problem, except I used the brightness lever on the Chromega head. If I need more light I will try the aperture on the lens as well.

I was having trouble reading the test strip. I followed the directions about using the enlarger as the light source. I imagine if I just use a bright lamp it will be better.

It does sound like my probe is not as sensitive as yours however. The negative I was printing would hardly be called bullet proof. In fact they print nicely on the medium contrast paper with only minor manipulations.

 

[L Gebhardt]

Harry, thanks for the link. It looks like it may be very helpfull.

 

[Nick Zentena]

I've got this vague memory that the older units shipped with a smaller spot probe opening. Being smaller it lets less light in. Try taking the round cover part off the top of the probe when you test the grey strip. That's assuming you're using the spot cover on the probe. If that helps maybe order the current spot cover? On the Lici website they list the smaller 4mm probe cover but I don't see the bigger one listed on it's own.