Hi
didn't have much time before but I have a few more moments now
The question of which scanner is a vexed one. Firstly I'll say that myself I
have also struggled with the balance of gear desires VS budgetary restrictions. Worse, 10 years ago the prices were slightly higher than you
face now and 1000 bucks meant a lot more than it does now (compare what sort of car you get for a thousand bucks now vs then)
I also have found that the differences between an older 2700dpi dedicated film scanner and a flatbed Epson may not be as substantial as many would have you think. I've compared my 4870 with my Nikon LS-20 (2700dpi, no ICE available)
and then later my LS-40 (2900dpi with a good ICE system) and I still use my 4870 or 4990 ... it was only when I went to the LS-4000 that I found that I got results which were worth the hassle.
Hassle? YES .. hassle! You see as you require higher detail from your film,
you require higher precision. Good focus is as important as having good optics in the process. I'll put this on its own line:
without manually choosing a focus point of good contrast in your image the Auto Focus software will not give you the sharpest image possible from your film.
As you'll see from my blog post mentioned above a slightly blury image from a Nikon will be no better than the images you'll get time after time (and in
much less time) out of your Epson 4990 ... with no effort.
I can load 4 strips of 6 frames (they don't even need to be from the same roll) into my epson, select them all, click scan and wander off, not needing
to do anything. Heck, I can even apply the same settings to each scan, or choose specific images from those strips.
You just can't do that with any other scanner. Only the LS-4000 and 5000 with their strip feeder approach this, and even then only with uncut whole rolls ... do you store your film this way?
I don't
So, in your oder:
Nikon LS-2000 ~2800 ppi
Nikon Coolscan III LS-30 ~2700 ppi
the LS x0 series are the 'home' user models and the LS x0000 series are the professional ones. The new price was typically at least double that of the 2 digit models. I've owned and LS-20 (and still own it), LS-40 and LS-4000 scanners (still using the 4000)
I would only consider the two scanners you mention above if you personally know the seller and the scanner. the LS-2000 have been the cornerstone of many small businesses slide printing outfits.
There have been numerous advances in the mechanical and optical design of the Nikons from day one and the LS-2000 represents the starting point of it being good for me. But they are SCSI and often old. SCSI scanners will limit you on
what OS you can use (nothing much new uses this anymore) and you will be restricted as to what SCSI hardware will work too.
Having said that my LS-20 gave results almost identical to my friends LS-30 ... and that models ICE was dreadful ... my LS-20 gave superior results if compared to his machine with ICE.
IF you are willing to go down the SCSI path then you can likely get an LS-20 for about $50 If I was in Australia I'd post you mine for you covering the postage.
out of this list:
Minolta Dimage F-2800.
Minolta Dimage LF-2900 ~2800 dpi
Minolta Dimage 5400
Canon CanoScan FS2710
of that bundle I would only consider the Dimage 5400
[/QUOTE]
Plustek OpticFilm 7200 -- $200 new at Adorama. A new 7200 ppi scanner for only $200?
Yes, and I share your skepticism. However with that in mind I've sent a pair of strips of 35mm to mrred on this forum who has offered to be involved in a collaborative effort to compare the Plustek to my LS-4000, I've scanned the film already my end and so when he gets his results I'll put them on my blog and we can go from there.
Hopefully this will help answer that important question, as if it IS comparable with the Nikons then the insane prices fetched for LS-40 (aka LS-IV) can be put to bed. Of course there will be some unresolved issues such as scanner operator and product variation, but to solve that will require more extensive work.
lastly, if you're interested I can send you a file I have saved from a WWW site comparing the 5400 with the LS-5000 ... you will need IE to open it as it is saved as a MHT file ... let me know if you want to read that