Scanner selection for medium format and 35mm

ginandtonic · Aug 24, 2017

Hi guys,

A bit of advice. I want to get a new scanner so that I can get into medium format. I currently have a 35mm plustek scanner, which is great. I was thinking about getting a flatbed but thought that would lead to lower quality scans for my 35mm. I have the opportunity to buy a relatively cheap Nikon Coolscan 8000.

My question is this. The coolscan is now around 15 years old. Have modern flatbeds caught up? Or am I going to get better quality scans on the Nikon than any modern flatbed.

Any advice hugely appreciated.

darkosaric · Aug 24, 2017

I have tried modern Epson flatbed - but I prefer Nikon Coolscan results (don't own any of those 2 - but if I can choose - I would go with the Nikon). Only if you want also large format - then flatbed scanners with bigger that medium format are the way to go.

ginandtonic · Aug 24, 2017

Hvala Darko!

Diapositivo · Aug 24, 2017

ginandtonic said:
Hi guys,

A bit of advice. I want to get a new scanner so that I can get into medium format. I currently have a 35mm plustek scanner, which is great. I was thinking about getting a flatbed but thought that would lead to lower quality scans for my 35mm. I have the opportunity to buy a relatively cheap Nikon Coolscan 8000.

My question is this. The coolscan is now around 15 years old. Have modern flatbeds caught up? Or am I going to get better quality scans on the Nikon than any modern flatbed.

Any advice hugely appreciated.

My advice is to buy the relatively cheap Nikon 8000 without hesitation. A flatbed scanner cannot compete with a dedicated film scanner. I have a Nikon 5000 which is more or less of the same technology but ony small format. Quality is excellent. I suggest you buy a dedicated scanner software like VueScan or Silverfast.
You will extract huge details from your medium format films. You'll soon have to buy a new computer and some serious storage space...

RattyMouse · Aug 24, 2017

ginandtonic said:
Hi guys,

A bit of advice. I want to get a new scanner so that I can get into medium format. I currently have a 35mm plustek scanner, which is great. I was thinking about getting a flatbed but thought that would lead to lower quality scans for my 35mm. I have the opportunity to buy a relatively cheap Nikon Coolscan 8000.

My question is this. The coolscan is now around 15 years old. Have modern flatbeds caught up? Or am I going to get better quality scans on the Nikon than any modern flatbed.

Any advice hugely appreciated.

I shoot primarily medium format film and use a Plustek OpticFilm 120. It's as good as it gets at its price range and I am very pleased with it, aside from the gut wrenchingly awful SilverFast software, which is commonly used on most scanners.

ginandtonic · Aug 24, 2017

RattyMouse said:
awful SilverFast software, which is commonly used on most scanners.

VueScan is definitely worth the small investment

RattyMouse · Aug 24, 2017

ginandtonic said:
VueScan is definitely worth the small investment

I may get there. I've looked at it in the past but decided to struggle on with SilverFast. This thread may make me give VueScan another try. As you said, the cost isnt that much at all.

Kino · Aug 24, 2017

RattyMouse said:
I may get there. I've looked at it in the past but decided to struggle on with SilverFast. This thread may make me give VueScan another try. As you said, the cost isnt that much at all.

What is it about Silverfast you dislike?

RattyMouse · Aug 24, 2017

Kino said:
What is it about Silverfast you dislike?

Oh my god, that list is long and hard. It is a profoundly awful piece of software that comes close, very very close, to ruining my enjoyment of film photography. I have cursed the name of LaserSoft more times than I can possibly recall.

I dont want to compile a list of how horrible this piece of crapware is. Suffice it to say that I just don't get alone well with SilverFast.

Kino · Aug 24, 2017

It came bundled in a lite version for my Epson 4990, but I preferred the native Epson Scan program in totally manual mode.

I didn't particularly hate the program, I just prefer to make my adjustments without automatic "assumptions"...

Saganich · Aug 24, 2017

I keep a Minolta DiMAGE 5400 First version for 35mm and Epson v700 for medium format. I'm not all that happy with the v700 scans, but its better than nothing if you can't afford a 120 film scanner. The glass on mine got all foggy inside probably from the glue fumes used around the edge of the glass. Had to take it apart and clean, not difficult. I switched from Silverfast to Vuescan and they are two different realities and work flow. The best software is one that allows you to scan B&W without any adjustment IMHO (is that a RAW scan?) After 10 years of scanning B&W film I have more questions than answers but fine print quality results are achievable but the learning curve is long and steep.

Patrick Robert James · Aug 24, 2017

If you have a chance to get a Nikon then do it! Don't even hesitate.

You will be sorely disappointed with scanning 35mm on a flatbed unless you get one of the good old ones like an Eversmart.

Vuescan is the way to go for software. You will have to learn it, but if you get the pro version it is good for life so you won't have to "upgrade" when you get a new computer, or new scanner like with Silverfast.

faberryman · Aug 24, 2017

Saganich said:
After 10 years of scanning B&W film I have more questions than answers but fine print quality results are achievable but the learning curve is long and steep.

Perhaps my prints aren't as "fine print quality" as yours, but I haven't found Silverfast or Vuescan that difficult to use. I am pretty happy with my black and white prints. In many cases, using LR/PS, I am able to make prints I couldn't using wet processes. Everyone's learning curve differs, so I wouldn't want to deter anyone by overstating the difficulties.

brent8927 · Aug 24, 2017

I use a V700 and have been very happy with the results the past ~10 years or so. I wish I could buy a Nikon 9000, but between the cost, the inability to service them anymore, and the likelihood I wouldn't notice a significant enough difference to justify spending $2000+, I haven't. I don't think the current generation of dedicated film scanners produce a significant enough improvement compared to the V700, and they have a lot of reliability issues apparently. Still, I would love a auto-focusing MF scanner, and I believe the Coolscan is the last one that did that.

Here are my results with the V700. All my flickr images were scanned with the V700 and then edited in Photoshop/Lightroom.
Dead Link Removed

If anyone knows if I'd actually see significant improvement when printing 5x5 and up to 15x15, then I'd love to hear it. Especially if there's someone out there who can service a Coolscan if the electronics go...

Sirius Glass · Aug 24, 2017

I got a reconditioned Epson photo scanner 4490 directly from the Epson website several years ago for under $100US including shipping.

mwdake · Aug 24, 2017

Sirius Glass said:
I got a reconditioned Epson photo scanner 4490 directly from the Epson website several years ago for under $100US including shipping.

I have that same model scanner, bought of Craigslist for $100 from I guy fanatical about keeping his gear in perfect condition.
I am not looking for scanning perfection so it does what I need.
I use the Epson Scan application in full manual mode and the only thing I adjust are the levels then make final adjustments on the PC.
The only thing that annoyed me on the 4490 was the 120 holder could only do 2 rows of 2 6x7 but my strips in 3 so that meant fiddling to move the strips over to the 3rd negative each time. I figured the actual scanning area could scan 3 6x7 if oriented lengthways so I fashioned my own film holder to do so and now I can scan 2 rows of 3 6x7.

Richard Man · Aug 24, 2017

If you can afford the LS-8000, buy it. It will be much better than any options less expensive than it.

Richard Man · Aug 24, 2017

BTW, electronics don't die that easily. People are still fixing electronic cameras from the 80s... Good service people are harder to find of course, but not impossible.

Heck, I even found someone in US (Pro Cameras in SC) that fixed my Hasselbled FE lens, when it was "common knowledge" that no one else but Hasselblad will touch FE stuff.

Ko.Fe. · Aug 24, 2017

Honestly, I see some lack of resolution for 135 film with my Epson V500 (for prints size I don't print ), but with 120 film it is great. And nothing, but Epson original scan utility. Silverfast is for scanners with dinky software. Epson software is great. Not if you need to manipulate it, but to get good TIFF files to work with in LR.

Old Nikon scanner is as any preferential old equipment. Cables and drivers.

phrons · Aug 24, 2017

I have a v550

135 for me I usually stay at 4x6, you can get away with 5x7 max. Maybe A4 size if you are viewing distance is at least 3FT/1M

120 you can easily do A3 size, or perhaps bigger, but I do not have experience going bigger.

The question you should really ask yourself is "do I print?"

If you don't print and your scans are for social media, you absolutely do not need anything more than a flatbed scanner. After that, it depends on what you are printing, the size of your printing, and the expected viewing distance of your photos.

I know too many people that spend useless amount of money on scanners and they don't actually print anything. They stupidly think that they need the absolute best resolution so people can look at their photos on an iPhone.

brent8927 · Aug 24, 2017

Richard Man said:
BTW, electronics don't die that easily. People are still fixing electronic cameras from the 80s... Good service people are harder to find of course, but not impossible.

Heck, I even found someone in US (Pro Cameras in SC) that fixed my Hasselbled FE lens, when it was "common knowledge" that no one else but Hasselblad will touch FE stuff.

I think the problem is you can't find parts for the Coolscans anymore, so if a critical part (like the motherboard/logic board, or whatever it's called) goes bad, you're not going to be able to fix it without buying a unit to salvage from. But, Nikon typically builds things well, so hopefully it's unlikely. But it would be the main thing I would worry about--spending $2000-$3000 (seems to be the rate for the 9000's, which are a little newer) for a scanner, only for it to turn into a large paperweight.

Patrick Robert James · Aug 24, 2017

I've put somewhere north of 50,000 scans through my Nikon 4000 and I got it used. I wouldn't worry about the durability of a Nikon scanner.

Poisson Du Jour · Aug 25, 2017

ginandtonic said:
Hi guys,

My question is this. The coolscan is now around 15 years old. Have modern flatbeds caught up? Or am I going to get better quality scans on the Nikon than any modern flatbed.

Epson's V800 might be a good start; it uses the usual primitive holders for 35mm, 120 and 4x5 with a template for 8x10. If you really want to get anal with scan quality, BetterScan holders are the way to go.

If your end result is prints — 'uge and bigly prints, go for a drum scan and hang the cost. A desktop scanner, even the Epsons and Nikons, will not match that. If all you are doing is web scans a desktop of any persuasion will be fine. The learning curve is something you need to invest in e.g. minimal work at the scan step (profiling), any major corrections in post (USM scan loss, white point correction etc. in Lightroom, PS, or whatever). Don't think that leaving a scanner on all-auto will provide the best results. It won't. The best results come from an investment in learning and lots of experience.

Alan Johnson · Aug 25, 2017

A 6x7 negative has a length of 2.75 ins, the V 700 has a true resolution about 2300 dpi giving 2.75 x 2300 = 6325 dots.
If that is printed at 300 dpi it gives a print width of 21 ins.

Richard Man · Aug 25, 2017

brent8927 said:
I think the problem is you can't find parts for the Coolscans anymore, so if a critical part (like the motherboard/logic board, or whatever it's called) goes bad, you're not going to be able to fix it without buying a unit to salvage from. But, Nikon typically builds things well, so hopefully it's unlikely. But it would be the main thing I would worry about--spending $2000-$3000 (seems to be the rate for the 9000's, which are a little newer) for a scanner, only for it to turn into a large paperweight.

I have never heard of anyone who has a broken Nikon and cannot get it repaired. This is one of those "could happen" stories and just don't have much supporting data. Electronics don't die that easily. The motor may but even there. The motor is really being taxed that much.

Scanner selection for medium format and 35mm

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency