If I'm reading this correctly, with this mod, there will (hopefully) be no external power supply needed and everything will be neatly stored inside the scanner housing?
I guess ICE won't work with the mod?
the increased backlight emphasizes the infamous flares
If this is really due to the increased intensity of the backlight, would it help to just use a less bright LED array? Sounds cheaper than sending the sensor out to be decapitated.
Everyone of these scanners was plagued by this issue. Coolscan included.
Can I ask the moderators, in the interest of other owners out there scanning less demanding material who might end end up gutting these devices for an inexistent improvement, to have this thread renamed to "Minolta 5400 Mark 1 - ZigZag artefacts in extremely underexposed portion of slide film".
Everyone of these scanners was plagued by this issue.
For the record, this is incorrect.
AFAIK the issue @Archiloque referred to was the issue with reflections caused by the sensor design.
Mate. What a weird way to enter this conversation with a machete ready. It's stipulated everywhere that the flare issue is mostly visible with contrasty slides. As for the zigzag issue : same. It's written everyyyywhere.
I am not sure I understand what you're talking about.
How bad is the flare? Nikon Coolscan bad, or even worse?
If you still have the new light source in place, can you make a scan with a negative frame separation is in the middle of the frame?
Thanks for the precious informations.
I do have a 5400 MK2 that I've put to test regarding this flaring issue, and it is true that, if not perfect, it's really a lot cleaner with very contrasty slides than the 5400 mk1.
The only downside with it, is that, despite its ceramic capacitors and zig-zagless noise, its noise floor is a lot more apparent and crude. Also, mine has a tendancy to have very magenta teinted shadows. It is said that, in order to compete with the faster Coolscan, Minolta released the MK2 with barely modified mecanics (even the led backlight parts looks like the MK1, bar a few led instead of a fluo tube) and increased gain. That may be the explanation for this cruder noise floor.
Meanwhile in my futile quest for the perfect scanner, I've received a 185 euros quote for the glass removal of the CCD sensor. I may go ahead with it, I just need to find a way to desolder it from its PCB as Eureca told me the procedure would be a lot riskier with a PCB. So, now, I need to get a desolder pump and hope for the best. I think i'll do it for completion sake.
Mate. What a weird way to enter this conversation with a machete ready. It's stipulated everywhere in this topic that the flare issue is mostly visible with very contrasty slides. As for the zigzag issue : same. It's written everyyyywhere in this topic as well. Do I need to quote myself calling myself silly because I am trying to solve something that isn't very important ? Can we enjoy a friendly search for useless perfection without being called out?
And YES, this issue is visible with Coolscan. In particular conditions. You shoot negatives? Good news, you have nothing to worry about. I shoot slides, including Velvia. And in some rare conditions, this flaring issue can be seen harshly. I'll post an example if you want when I get home. Obviously we're talking 0.2% of my pictures. We could care less, right? Well, no, that's the fun part, we care about useless things. It's a scanner forum! It's as niche as it gets.
Now, about Coolscan, to add onto my Minolta fetichism, I currently own a fleet of them : Coolscan IV, a V, a 4000, a 5000 and a 9000. Oh I even forgot a SCSI LS 2000. Obviously I like to test them to keep the best copies. I've had four 9000 in my hands and everyone had different issues when pushed with difficult slides. They are the ultimate test. Everyone of them had flare issue in these particular (and rare) conditions. Everyone. It's been talked for 2 decades on every specialized forums. Do not act like this is news.
Yeah, I shoot around 1 or 2 roll a month and it doesn't make any sense. I know. Bear with me. It's a hobby. Obviously, a few of them are about to be sold as I service them regularly before selling them back to the community at a fair price. Anyway I know Coolscans. Probably more than you do, not that I am particularly proud of it.
Useless? Of course. I mean we're talking about 25 years old scanners...
EDIT : clarified my first paragraph since it was understood the wrong way.
Here is a link to a topic discussing the issue on contrasty slides with foliage. It's in german but you'll have it translated easily. I have gotten similar results with similar kind of slides.I bought the CS5000 when it first came out and have since acquired a V and a 9000 - all still running Nikonscan on Windows Vista. Have now scanned >30K frames of various films, and have participated in many of those original discussions about this purported flare issue so I am curious about what you're experiencing.
If you can, please post a shot of the slide film on a light box, a neutral scan for reference and your enhancement to show the flare.
Here is a link to a topic discussing the issue on contrasty slides with foliage. It's in german but you'll have it translated easily. I have gotten similar results with similar kind of slides.
The original poster had the CCD glass cover removed. You can see the results in the topic.
You can, but I don't see a good reason to do this. The thread title mentions a specific problem related to a specific product type. This is a usual and sensible way of formulating a thread title. The fact that not every device suffers from the same problem and/or that not every user is aware of or bothered by it, does not need to be reflected in the thread title.
Also, please note one more thing:
AFAIK the issue @Archiloque referred to was the issue with reflections caused by the sensor design. Not the zigzag noise problem.
Yes. I did try digital camera scanning and didn't get flaring problems on complicated slides. But, in a perfect world, I'd like to have ICE and keep using my Coolscan 5000 as I do. Letting it scan a full roll unattended like I currently do.
Reminder that, with negatives, flaring is a non issue. And with slides it's really rare as well.
Thanks for the precious informations.
I do have a 5400 MK2 that I've put to test regarding this flaring issue, and it is true that, if not perfect, it's really a lot cleaner with very contrasty slides than the 5400 mk1.
The only downside with it, is that, despite its ceramic capacitors and zig-zagless noise, its noise floor is a lot more apparent and crude. Also, mine has a tendancy to have very magenta teinted shadows. It is said that, in order to compete with the faster Coolscan, Minolta released the MK2 with barely modified mecanics (even the led backlight parts looks like the MK1, bar a few led instead of a fluo tube) and increased gain. That may be the explanation for this cruder noise floor.
Meanwhile in my futile quest for the perfect scanner, I've received a 185 euros quote for the glass removal of the CCD sensor. I may go ahead with it, I just need to find a way to desolder it from its PCB as Eureca told me the procedure would be a lot riskier with a PCB. So, now, I need to get a desolder pump and hope for the best. I think i'll do it for completion sake.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?