Looking for a film/slide scanner

I'd appreciate any opinions

[photon]

I switched to digital photography a year or so ago. I'm now at the point where I'd like to digitize my decades worth of film negatives (color and black & white) and slides. So I'm looking for a film scanner (I already have an older flatbed scanner).

I've been leaning towards the Nikon Coolscan series. Does anyone have any experience with it or other scanners they can recommend? I'd like to stay below US$1000.

Thanks.

I had posted this in the Webmaster Hardware forum a week ago and got no replies, so I'm trying here now.

[Fiver]

The only experience I have with such a scanner was recently, using the CanoScan 4200F - which is about $150 canadian. Quite cheap, but we couldn't find anything mid-range in the usual selection of stores.

The goal was to scan slides of paintings.

The result was less than impressive colour reproduction. We took the scanner back right away. There's no point trying to scan something like a painting if it can't get the colours right.

The scanner also has a dock for film negatives, and the options in the software to scan them. I think you would get perfectly satisfactory results if you were just digitizing some old family photos.

But if you're a photographer, and you already deal with the myriad of colour problems inherent in trying to capture the real world accurately, you're likely too picky for this scanner. I was, and I'm just an amateur.

[pmkpmk]

Even though I'm a very big fan of Canon in almost all aspects, the Coolscan is definetly the one you should go for!

[dbhatta]

If you are going to be scanning slides be prepared to spend lots of time in front of the machine. Even film if they have been cut from the roll will have to be there to put it in and scan it.

I work for a small lab and we got one of those mid range machines, a real pain. Takes 2-3 minutes a slide.

Make sure your machine has Digital ICE (takes away scratches when scanning, has to be scanned with different infared lights to compared and find the scratches, hence the extra time). Also the scanner should have ROC/GEM. Without the ICE your pictures will suck, the ROC = restoration of original colors, sometimes restores to the wrong color so experiment with it on and off.

Be prepared to spend 2-3 minutes per frame with the ICE on. If you dont want the ice will take about 30 seconds but the quality really sucks.

I suggest you take it to a lab close to where you live, and negotiate a price. That way you'll save your $500+ on the machine and lots of time and many many headaches.

[bull]

I'm using a Super Coolscan 9000 ED when I'm at the University (have some older 6x9 stuff to scan, too). The quality is excellent, especially when using the "Extra sharp" feature and Digital ICE4. However, the scanner is slow and the Nikon software is pure BS - cannot save LZW-TIFF (so open and re-save in Photoshop), does not keep previous settings.
If you have only 35mm slides you should perhaps go for a Coolscan V ED. It is, what I've heard, slower and cheaper than the Coolscan 5000ED, but with only a minor quality difference.

[photon]

Thanks for opinions so far.

I'm not a professional photographer, but I'd classify myself as an advanced amateur. At this point I'm looking to get good, consistent color. I'm not too concerned with getting precise color within half a Kelvin or so.

I had thought about the Canon because of the price, but after reading multiple reviews I decided that it was worth the extra money to give the CoolScan the edge.

I took a couple of rolls of negatives to various processors around town just to feel for prices and quality. It was after that that I started looking for scanners. Scanning the negatives myself from just one of my trips would more than pay for the price of the CoolScan. Considering that I have over thirty years of negatives and slides I'd like to scan, it's practically a steal at twice the price!

More opinions/advice welcome....