 |
Digital Cameras Photo Reviews of Nikon CoolScan V ED Film ScannerCustomer Review: Nice scans but software is slow Summary: 4 StarsI am very pleased with the scanner from a hardware perspective and quality of the scans but the software is very clunky and has not been updated for several years for Mac OS X. While it does function, it crashes often and is very slow on my dual G5 tower.
Customer Review: Don't use for a large batch of slides. Summary: 3 StarsWorks very well and is great for negatives or small numbers of slides. However, it doesn't support the SF-210 slide feeder, which is essential for doing large numbers of slides. (despite its known problems with jamming, the SF-210 is much better than hand feeding slides individually)
If you're planning on scanning more than 100-200 slides, you really need a slide feeder. Trust me.
The stock software isn't very good, particularly on mac (it's a PowerPC app, so it needs to run in Rosetta on an Intel mac). I use Vuescan, which is much better and very reasonably priced.
Customer Review: Awesome scanner Summary: 5 StarsThe ICE4 and software and scanner all do a great job of making old slides look like they were professionally restored, but with just a few clicks of the mouse.
Customer Review: The best scanner as of 2008...buy it! Summary: 5 Starsi have been a photographer for more than 30 years and I've been 100% digital since 2004 when digital SLRs finally became affordable. The huge and overwhelming archive of 35mm slides and negatives have been screaming for digital conversion. After several failed attempts with Plustek 7200 and Pacific Image, I decided to spend the $$$ for the best...well worth it! Sadly, the Nikon Coolscan V is a little tough to find as most internet website state "out of stock" or "backordered". Thankfully, I found a reasonable priced brand new unit on eBay for $596. I have completed my slide scanning with amazing results and now I'm working on the C-41 negatives, possibly a little too late as some of them are damaged beyond hope. The Digital ICE software technology is truly astounding. I have been scanning at 4000dpi and 14-bit depth...the resulting TIFF files are >100mb each so you absolutely need a huge hard drive and lots of memory (RAM). Unfortunately, the Adobe Photoshop Elements 5.0 software has limitations with 14-bit depth, however no limitations with 8-bit depth. All in all, I would recommend this to any & all photographers with archival needs...the caveat being this "the user needs to have experience with PC software"
Customer Review: Best tool for the job Summary: 5 StarsI'd wanted to scan in my 35mm negatives for years, not only archiving all our photos onto CDs that could be stored in a fireproof safe, but organizing them as well.
I estimated we had about 3000-4000 photos. My parents have thousands of slides in carousels that I would tackle after ours had been done.
I am right now about 3000 photos into my project. I was way off, I think I am only a 1/3 of the way through, judging by the boxes of negatives that remain.
The Coolscan V is the correct tool for this job. Before starting this project, I spent about a year researching various methods (in my spare time). I narrowed it down to the Nikon because of all the good reviews. What I didn't realize was how good the Digital ICE really is. For the first week, I explored all the different settings, trying to work out the best process for my archival project. There is a huge difference with ICE turned on. Negatives that have been thrown into a paper bag, stacked on top of each other (no negative sleeves) with scratches and dust produced photos that I was able to color correct (in photoshop) to look like they were taken on my DSLR today! (Except for the fact that both my wife and I look 15+ years younger...)
While you can do some post processing within the provided software, I found that the best workflow was to generate some presets, load a negative strip, click a few buttons, and let the resultant images "pile up" in "Batch" folders. I would then import these files (named after the pages & slot locations the negative would reside in after the scan) into Lightroom and start the metadata tagging process. The hardest part of the scanning process is the metadata tagging process (at least for me). I try to get the correct year & month, tag all the people in the photo, the location, etc.
The biggest problem I have with the product is the software. It is kind of picky and will crash after running for about an hour, usually when ejecting the negative. I have never seen it crash during a scan, and I've never witnessed corrupted images.
This comes with the negative strip feeder and the slide adapter. While it will accept negative strips of up to I believe 6 or 8 negatives, all of ours are cut into strips of 4 photos. Slides are very slow as you can only scan one at a time. It will do Kodachrome, you have to test out the different settings (I believe I turned off some of the post processing).
If you have a lot of 35mm negatives to scan in, this is your best option. Large numbers of slides might be a bit slow going.
It doesn't do medium format (120) you'd need to go to the 9000 for that (I have some TLRs and medium format film that I want scanned, still working on that one).
At first, I wanted to produce the highest quality, 16bit tiff images. The resultant files were just way too big. When I took a step back, I realized that a lot of our negatives are snapshots from point and shoot 35mm cameras, maximizing scan quality wasn't going to improve the quality. I am now scanning everything in at 240DPI and saving as jpgs. I am storing all the negatives in archival quality negative pages and naming the resultant files in such a way as to be able to easily locate the physical negative. During the metadata tagging process, if I find a photo that I just adore, I mark it (5 stars, color code, etc) and will then go back afterwards and produce the highest quality scan and save to Tif. This will allow me to get through my entire collection this year (I figured it would take a calendar year to complete)...
More Customer Reviews: ‹ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 › Last Review
|
 |