Dear Leica, Please Make Us a Dedicated Scanner!

<p align="left">Leica is dedicated to film. It continues the M7 and the MP, along with special issue film cameras based on the MP. It seems perfectly logical to me that Leica ought to make a high quality affordable dedicated film scanner.</p>

<p align="left"> </p>

<p align="left">There are current dedicated film scanners that work with the latest computers and produce results that are acceptable to excellent. The best are the drum scanners and they are extremely expensive. The rest that are medium priced are good, but not as good as the now discontinued dedicated scanners made by Nikon and Konica-Minolta. These old scanners are still around and can be had for a reasonable or unreasonable price (in the case of the Nikon Cool Scan 9000). Unfortunately they wearing with age and either cannot be repaired in the absence of spare parts or will soon be impossible to be repaired. None can operate with modern computers, at least not without compromising their excellent scanning systems.</p>

<p align="left"> </p>

<p align="left">Leica has the resources and the expertise to make a dedicated film scanner if there was enough demand for one.</p>

<p align="left"> </p>

<p align="left">I would like a scanner that could handle MF and panoramic as well as regular 35mm film like the Nikon Cool Scan 9000. This might be asking too much. I would settle for an improved version of my Konica-Minolta, which I use on an aging Apple laptop.</p>

<p>Alex, how many of your shots will you actually enlarge ? If you want semi-quality reference (I mean reference) you can get any scanner to do that and the ones the you sell or wishing to put on the wall....have that done professionally on a drum....and you are done.</p>

<p>Hope you realize what you are asking for....anything with Leitz/Leica on the frame will cost absurd amount (4K+)...mostly because of the name. Can we get any guarantee that they'll support it for the next 10-15-20 years ?</p>

<p>Les</p>

"Leica has the resources and the expertise to make a dedicated film scanner if there was enough demand for one."

 

What resources and expertise does Leica have that Konica-Minolta and Nikon lack in the field of manufacturing film scanners? I suspect Nikon would still be making film scanners if there was sufficient demand to make it profitable.

First thought: Not going to happen.

 

Why not pick up a lightly used Nikon scanner? It will probably continue to work for as long as there's an

independent party making software for it.

<p>Mr Dixon. Please read what I wrote again. I did not say that Nikon and Konica-Minolta are lacking in resources expertise or that Leica has more expertise. I said, "Leica has the resources and the expertise to make a dedicated film scanner if there was enough demand for one." And that is all.<br>

I have no idea what Konica-Minolta and Nikon have on their mind these days, except they seem to be done with film. </p>

<p>Leica is certainly not done with film. You can get your M7 and MP custom tailored to your needs and whims, which you cannot with the digital Ms. That is a pretty big commitment to film.</p>

<p>There is a demand for dedicated scanners and they are being made. Check Amazon.com. I have a Plustek OpticFilm 8100 film scanner which works very well once I got VuSan for it. But it is not as good as my Konica-Minolta.<br>

There would be no problem for Leica to make a dedicated scanner because the technology and information is already out there. All that Leica would need to do is to tweak existing technology to work on contemporary computers. This not like going to Mars.<br>

Leszek, some good points. You can always have the professional scanning done by someone. There are times, for various reasons, when you want or need the option of doing it yourself. </p>

<p>I know that a Leica dedicated scanner would not be cheap. About $4000? That is what I was thinking. Well, okay. I'm ready to bite the bullet. Consider that the Nikon Cool Scan 9000 is now going for $6000. Is has gone up in price since it was discontinued. There are people willing to pay that price. Think about that.</p>

<p>"Can we get any guarantee that they'll support it for the next 10-15-20 years ?" This question requires a crystal ball. All I can say is that Leica is a good record of supporting its equipment--or at any rate better than a lot of companies I could name. There is also a not small cottage industry dedicated to fixing and maintaining Leica equipment. A Leica scanner might outlive me.<br>

<br>

</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi Ray. I truly wish I could pick up a Nikon Cool Scan 9000. I wish I could get it at a reasonable price (like what used equipment should go for). I wish I could use it on my new Mac. I wish parts were readily available for that scanner. </p>

<p>I recently read a distress posting in the Digital Darkroom forum. Someone broke into the poster's house and stole her computer. What upset her most was that the thief took the cord connecting the computer to her Cool Scan 9000. All her files were backed up and she could get another computer. But the cord was another matter. It was a special cord made for the Cool Scan and it was not readily available.</p>

<p>Let me tell you about my Konica Minolta. Suddenly it started to not work properly. I contacted my tech at work and he contacted another tech who said that there was no way anyone would want to touch it, give its construction. The shell was glued together. Fortunately, my scanner bounced back. It overheated. I need to be careful during the summer. It loves air conditioning and bracingly cool weather. </p>

<p>It only scanners were made like film Leicas.</p>

<p>Leica making an "affordable" scanner. hahahahahahahaha!!!</p>

<p>Ian, it's relative. Check out the prices for drum scanners. When you talk about Leica, "affordable" takes on a heavier shade of green (or whatever color your national currency is).</p>

<p>I think it would be difficult for a company like Leica to produce them at a price point that would sell in large enough numbers to generate even a small profit. Certain components they could design and produce in house, but I actually think there are quite a few things about digital scanning technology that Leica doesn't have any expertise in and would have to be sourced from outside companies. In the end I think it's mostly a dead market regarding the demand for high end consumer film scanners. Such machines were in demand when there were a decent number of pros and experienced amateurs shooting a hybrid workflow during the film to digital transition years, but most of them have moved on to 100% digital now. The vast majority of the remaining people in the market for film scanners today are average folks who want to digitize old family negatives they found in the attic. A low to mid-range flatbed gives them acceptable and affordable quality for such a purpose and I know very few people who even own one of those.</p>

<p><em>"Ian, it's relative. etc"</em><br /> <em><br /></em>I just took my M9 into the shop, it had bent pin in the card scanner. My day to day workhorse cameras (Canon 5D MKII) would have been fixed in 5 biz days max. The cost would have been under US$100. The M9? US$300. Delivery time? 8 months!!! Hahahahahaha! I love this thing, but it's a toy camera for dentists.<br /> The possibility of them coming up with an "affordable" scanner is << 0%. Deal with it. <br /> Leica doesn't give a rat's ass about you or me.<br /> The last gasp...<br /> <img src="https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3889/14783290723_3566fb50c8_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

That is a pain, Ian. My M8 had to be fixed twice a I got a substitute M8 both times. Eight months is to long, I agree. I

wish I could have the income of a dentist without being one. One virtue of film Leicas is they can be repaired faster and

cheaper.

 

Which brings us back to the topic of this thread. Should Leica build us a film scanner? Or would you like them to do it?

Or might Zeiss do it? Or Cosina?

<p>I'd like to correct a couple of confusions about the Nikon Coolscan 9000. I am doing so from first-hand experience: I own one.</p>

<ul>

<li>They work fine with modern machines: I currently use mine on a late 2013 macbook pro running 10.9.5. I don't use (have never used) the Nikon SW, but VueScan, which is fine, and supports all the stuff that the scanner can do such as dust removal etc.</li>

<li>They do not need special cables: they have a conventional FireWire interface, cables for which are extremely widely available. To use one with a recent mac you need the FW-Thunderbolt adaptor which is available very cheaply. There is anough FW kit out there (a lot of it used by musicians) that FW support, perhaps via adaptors, will be available for a long time.</li>

</ul>

<p>So there is no problem at all using a Coolscan with a modern system. You can also buy one (used), right now, for about £2,500: I paid about £2,000 for mine three years ago. Unless I am much mistaken this is a fair way short of $6,000. So that is what Leica would be competing with.</p>

<p>I'd also like to at least raise the question of how dedicated Leica are to film. if you wanted to buy a film Leica what would you buy: a really nice M6 for a little over £1,000 (or an even nicer older M if you don't need metering, or don't mind an M5), or a new M7 for three times that price? So, OK, that's a silly question: there are so many really good film M bodies out there that no-one who wants to use a film M is going to buy new. So who <em>is</em> buying them, and why?</p>

<p>Well the answer to that is: it's the same people who buy mechanical watches, and for the same reason: these things are jewellery for men (mostly). As with mechanical watches, they are also beautiful, functional, tools, but that is not why they are made or sold. People who buy new film Leicas are not particularly interested in film other than as a fashion statement, and are certainly not interested in labouring over a hot scanner for hours: they leave that sort of thing to their minions.</p>

<p>Leica will not be making a scanner.</p>

<p>Daniel, your points are well taken and well on the subject. </p>

<p>It is true that Leica has never made a dedicated scanner before. On the other hand, Leica did create the first professional digital RF camera, a more difficult task than working with and updating the existing technology that goes into making dedicated scanners. </p>

<p>Your points about the dominance of digital photography are quite true up to a degree. The fact is that dedicated scanners are being produced right now, with Lomography's Smart Phone Film Scanner at the entry level and Hasselblad's Flextight X5 at the high end ($20,000 +). B&H seems to be doing a thriving business selling dedicated film scanners. See:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/hands-review/film-scanners-years-models-2014 .</p>

<p>(As far as film cameras go, Leica and Cosina are flying the flag. I believe Nikon is still making the F6.) </p>

<p>Dedicated film scanners are very much alive. The sad thing is that the best, save for the ultra-high end, have been discontinued. (Nikon and Konica-Minolta.) Leica could fill this gap with a dedicated scanner something like the Nikon Coolscan 9000.<br>

As I said, Leica seems the logical choice for a new upper mid-range dedicated film scanner, given their commitment to film photography.</p>

 

<p>Tim, thank you for the information on the Cool Scan 9000. I hope the photographer I mentioned is reading this or got the information. The $6000 figure is what I read on Amazon.com some time ago. Back in 1997 the 9000 was up to $4000 (about 400,000 yen) new. It is nice to know that in the UK this scanner is going at a fairly reasonable price. I was aware that one could use the the Cool Scan 9000 with VuSan. But I suspect VuScan does not match the original Nikon software. I use VuSan and like it very much for its ease of operation and the results in general. It is not all that good at removing dust and scratches. My Konica Minolta is brilliant at dust and scratch removal. </p>

<p>Well, yes, most probably Leica won't make a dedicated film scanner. Note that this thread is not making a prediction but a plea.</p>

<p> </p>

<p> I hope my comment will not be construed as thread drift... but here goes:</p>

<p>I've been doing some reading on another alternative, using a high pixel count camera with a macro lens and perhaps an extender or two to photograph a 35mm frame (slide or neg). I've been experimenting with a friend's old D70, my Micro-Nikkor lens and a Nikon Slide Copying Adapter, the LS-1. Results are comparable to what I got on my Nikon LS-2000. Both are quite low end being early models, but the results are indistinguishable.</p>

<p>Some folks are now using a later model camera with a high pixel count (the D70 is only about 6, I think). I'd be interested to hear comments from anyone who is using this more affordable alternative. And, it's much faster. Literally takes a fraction of a second, of course it does take a few moments to position the slide or film neg.</p>

<p>Paul</p>

Paul you have raised an interesting and important question. You know, Leica might make a film copier instead of a

scanner. I mean it is within realm of possibilities.

<p>In light of what Tim has said, we must ask what exactly is Leica's "commitment to film photography". I do not think that Leica can do anything to keep film photography alive. So long as film is made, Leica may continue to make inordinately expensive cameras to use it. They have the drawings and the tooling already, and their profits on very small number of units are probably enough to justify carrying on. If I was a photographer dedicated only to film and with no reason to use Leica RF cameras, my best option today would be a ridiculously cheap but perfectly capable SLR.</p>

<p>Thanks, Alex,</p>

<p>And I just thought of another wrinkle... you could set the camera on the bracketing mode and then with PhotoMatix or some other HDR approach you could merge the three exposures get a better dynamic range. I think I'll play with that idea.</p>

<p>Paul</p>

<p>nobody needs a BMW or Mercedes level ( high priced) scanner.<br>

I am sure the europeans could make one.,.<br>

However a better Idea would be if minolaa or nikon licensed the design to a smaller company. the overhead would nbe less. and thoigh to market would be too small for a hige corportion.<br>

a smaller company could make money selling a few thousand eaqch year.</p>

<p>Dear Nikon, Please Make Us again a Dedicated Scanner.<br>

I would be happy to pay a lot, i.e. > Coolscans, < Hasselblad. Otherwise, when my coolscan falls apart, I will have to go digital, and forget my beloved film cameras. I am not interested in substandard scanners, not rich enough to pay for a drum scanner.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>There are a few of good scanning services. I think for the money and quality I like digmypics.com in Arizona. Much more cost effective than scanning your own and certainly more time saving. I say this having a KM Dimage 5400 scanner and a lot of experience using it. Scanning has interesting software issues and a fairly steep learning curve. Unless you want to dedicate significant time and effort learning and scanning I think you are generally better off having scans made, specially at the reasonable prices of a place like digmypics. If you manage to have a few real art prints that you will make big you can have drum scans made and go big time. Good luck!</p>

<p>Dream on.</p>

<p>I think you've correctly identified a gap in the market. My idea of a 'perfect' scanner is basically a quality version of a sensor-in-a-box like this one:</p>

<p>http://www.officeworks.com.au/shop/officeworks/qpix-14-megapixel-film-and-print-scanner-bccbs1400</p>

<p>I also understand your points Alex. Leica is certainly competent in the optics/precision machining field, but I'm not so sure about their digital technology competence. As far as I know they have never produced the sensors for any of their digital cameras and have relied on outside firms for that.</p>

<p>Even if they do have the ability to do it I don't see it happening for many reasons. As you mention, there is a demand for film scanners, but in my opinion there is not a large demand for the type you mention. As with many things regarding film nowadays, a large chunk of the new found enthusiasm seems to be from a younger crowd who grew up with digital and are enamored by the "old school" technology. They usually don't buy new expensive film cameras either and I wouldn't be surprised if the last Nikon F6 was made years ago but the surplus is sitting in a warehouse somewhere selling slowly over time. Generally they seem to be ecstatic just to have any image appear on the negatives period. Odd/wonky colors effects shot on low quality film that would have been considered defective or representative of poor technique years ago are in style now. It seems to be more about the culture and making a statement rather than extracting the highest level of quality out of excellent film that has decades of development behind it from companies like Fuji and Kodak. Any old flat bed scanner will do for them as there is little point in a high end scanner to work with negatives that look as if they were shot out of a Holga.</p>

<p>I don't know how many film scanners B+H sells at any given price point, but I imagine that if the demand was high enough to justify producing something like the defunct Coolscans (at a profit mind you), Nikon wouldn't have stopped making them (or another company would have filled the gap). I just think that people such as yourself who shoot film with the idea of producing a high quality/resolution final product, and are willing to pay $4K for a scanner to do so, are few and far between. The handful whose livelihoods depend on it fill the market for the $20K Flextight scanners I suppose. Don't get me wrong, I still shoot medium format film on occasion and would love to have something like you mention, but sadly I think its time has passed.</p>

<p>Leica did make a digicopying do-dad about 10 years ago, and I think they could do this again to attach to a digital Leica-M - a Leica version of the cheapish slide copiers that you can buy easily on ebay. I think they could even rebadge a good one of these. These actually work pretty well and of course these do not require any long term service, or software updates.<br>

I agree with you, Alex, that Leica could promote the use of their film Leicas and Leica could produce such an item again. For all those people who throw up their hands and maintain this will not be good enough for their scanning needs, my experience using a high quality digicopying system is that it is my preferred method for digitizing slides and black and white negs and is superior to my Canon 4000FS 35mm scanner.</p>

<p>Nikon and Canon are simply just not interested in film anymore and have not been for many years, but ostensibly at least Leica do still have a legacy interest in film.</p>