Minolta pro vs Nikon 8000

[douglas_cummings]

Just tested both at Samy's. Could be individual samples but...

Nikon slightly nicer @ highest res BUT GROSS BANDING. I've

heard of this before- do you have to send it back or is it a

firmware problem?

[carl smith]

i don't think it's firmware, I think its a hardware problem, and i havent' heard of there beign any particularly reliable fix. I'd check out the minolta, its more expensive but also higher res (4800 dpi), I forget which model it is.

[aaron_rocky]

<A href="http://www.naturfotograf.com/LS8000ED_review.html">This review</A> might be helpful.

[allan_jamieson2]

There isn't any easy answer to this problem. On the face of it you

might think that the Minolta can scan at a higher resolution;

which it can, if you are scanning 35mm images, but not for

anything larger than that, except by interpolation. So, for true

scanning resolution the Nikon LS8000 is miles ahead of the

Minolta for medium format images.

 

I've had a few scans done for me by a friend with a Nikon

LS8000 and the overall quality was extremely good. The only

problem that I saw was with one image which was scanned with

the optional glass transparency carrier; which had very noticable

Newton Rings showing on the skyline.

 

I contacted Nikon myself, as I am interested in buying a film

scanner as well and they told me that they were aware that there

were problems with the glass carrier, but they still seemed to

feel justified in charging another 400 to 500 pounds for it, over

and above the 2400 pounds plus 17.5% sales tax that this

scanner sells for in the UK! Also, they hadn't finished new

software drivers to cope with the Mac OS X software that my new

computer uses. Not much point in buying something that can't

run properly on your computer without booting back into OS 9.

 

Apparently, with practice you shouldn't need to use the glass

transparency carrier in any case and the standard carrier that

comes with the scanner should be good enough for most

purposes.

 

I've heard a few mentions of the banding issue, but didn't see

any on the samples done for me, or on the images that another

photographer showed me scanned on the Nikon as well.

 

As it stands the Nikon isn't perfect and neither is the Minolta, but

there are very little options available in this price bracket other

than those two and maybe the Polaroid scanners. I've been

hoping for a slightly more refined version of the Nikon scanner to

come on the market, which will work the way that it is supposed

to, with no newton rings, banding or any other problems.

[allan_jamieson2]

I just read the review that Aaron included a link for, it is certainly

well worth looking at for anybody interested in buying the Nikon

LS8000.

[paul_wilson2]

I used to own an LS-8000 and returned it due to banding and general software instability. I also tried the Polaroid extensively and now I own the Minolta Scan Pro.

 

The Minolta does 4800 optical for 35mm and 3200 optical for medium format. It can actually do 4800 optical for the central 4cm of any image so you could scan most of a 6x4.5 image at 4800 dpi if you were really determined.

 

In any event, saying the LS-8000 is miles ahead of the Minolta for MF is a bit ridiculous. 3200 will give you plenty to work with from any MF neg size. From what I saw I guess I'd agree that the Nikon was *slightly* sharper in some cases when scanning MF.

 

However, in actual use I've found the Minolta to be quite a bit nicer. The film holders are better, they include a glass holder and the scanner is quieter and smaller. Really, you can't go wrong with any one of the three except that the Polaroid doesn't have ICE.

[allan_jamieson2]

The point that I was making is that when it comes to scanning at

maximum dpi, the Nikon LS8000 is considerably ahead of the

Minolta. Whether or not you actually need all that extra scanning

capability is another matter.

 

When it comes down to it, neither of them is perfect, they have

good points and bad points. In the Nikons case the film holder is

a weak point that various people have mentioned. Pity you

couldn't combine the best qualities of the Minolta and the Nikon.

[douglas_cummings]

That's really the jist of it- coudn't we just combine the strong

points. The Minolta scans were so dirty it must of been the

scanner and not the slide. ICE was NEEDED on every scan.

Maybe that's why it wasn't as sharp as the Nikon. But if you had

to scan everything in "Superfine" mode to get rid of the banding

on the Nikon:forget it! ~1 hour per MF scan! I'll be testing a new

UMAX flatbed ($4000) next...

[howard_slavitt2]

The answer is the Imacon Flextight Photo. The holders are perfect. The software wonderful. It's expensive, but barely more expensive than a $4,000 flatbed. No ICE, but careful dusting reduces the need for dusting to a minimum. Also, PS7's new healing brush works wonders.

[mark_uehling]

The LS8000 banding is easily solved by turning on the single sensor sampling. It is a check box in the scan window and it slows down the scanning considerably but eliminates the banding which only occurs on very high contrast slides. When the banding does show up, which is rarely, it shows up in the deep shadows of high contrast slides. Turning on the single sensor sampling eliminates it. Overall the LS8000 is an excellent scanner and the digital ICE is worth the cost of the scanner itself. Overall, I have no regrets with the Nikon.

[ray_hafen]

I always get banding in the dark areas of every scan without the sensor set to "extra

fine". Scanning time is extremely slow and it's driving me out of my mind.

Unfortunately I can't justify another couple of thousand $ or more to buy something

out. Nikon performance with this scanner is disappointing.

 

Now I'm trying to figure out how to get rid of the long scratch like mark that are

showing up in every scan. The only solution I've found is to use the multi scan

function at 8 passes which is taking about 45 minutes per scan. There is only 168

hours in a week and I have hundreds of MF images to scan.

 

One frustrated boy named Ray

[gurney_tim]

In regards to the banding I have noticed that the LS8000 banding does almost completly dispear when you run without color management, and apply custom profile when opening in PS.

 

Take into consideration that you "must" convert to PS image space you use before editing and/or printing, otherwise the color management used by PS will shift colors from those viewed.

 

I set PS "not to recognize" exif information(s) and apply profile (custom) when window apears, tick the "convert to working space".

 

This does take several seconds (depending on you file size and PC capacity) but is well worth the time saved on color editing your images.

 

Good luck and happy new year.

Tim