Questions about Nikon 8000/9000.

[peter_bongard]

Hello!

I'm interested in buying the Nikon 8000/9000 Film-Scanner and have some

questions about them:

- What are the advantages of the 9000 over the 8000 in terms of image quality

and speed?

- Is Digital ICE still possible with the optional Glass-Holder? Is it still

possible when wetmounting the film?

- Is it possible to use a USA-Model in Europe (Germany) because of the

different voltage?

- How does these models perform with silver-based b&w-Film and negative-film

(Portra 160NC). I'm not doing any slides.

 

Thanks in advance for your answers!

Peter

[Ed_Ingold]

I have the LS-8000, which meets my needs. The LS-9000 is somewhat faster and has additional image processing capability, but the same optics and film holders. Digital ICE works with the glass holder (a necessity for sharp, medium format scans), and should work fine with a wet holder as well. ICE will not work with B&W film because ICE depends on infrared light, which is blocked by silver in the emulsion.

 

Color negative film is what I use almost exclusively. ICE works with any color film, which is good because you can never get all of the dust off (wet-mounting won't help with dust, and adds bubbles).

 

The internal power supply is universal - 100-240 vac, 50/60 Hz. You need a power cord for your country, or (not recommended) a plug adapter.

 

Software makes a big difference in the ease and quality of scanning. Nikonscan is pretty good, but not very smart - you have to fiddle with controls to get good color and exposure. Silverfast AI is the best, IMO, and well worth the price. It comes with IT8 calibration tools and a 6x7 target.

[ciaran1664878390]

In addition to speed, the 9000 has improved resolution, color accuracy, and Dmax compared to the 8000. See the Pop Photo review at:

http://www.popphoto.com/digitalscanners/1054/nikon-super-coolscan-9000-ed.html

 

Some users also complained of a banding problem with the 8000, which seems to be solved in the 9000. There are some comments on this at:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/scanners/nikon-8000.shtml

[peter_weimann1]

Hi Peter,

I use the 9000 for scanning slide film and opposite to a previous poster I do not have to fiddle with the colors. I do not do much image processing in Nikonscan. That is Photoshop job. Overall I am very pleased with the results. You can see a lot of my images here:

http://view.stern.de/fc/user/5932/

 

All photos where the 9000 is shown as "camera" were scanned with it. All others with the Microtek 120TF.

Hope this helps

Greetings

[walterh]

Peter I see little advantage of the 9000 over the 8000. Does scanning in 22 minutes over 26 minutes give you the edge? Yes the newer model has better technical data but in use I see no real difference ( caveat: I only tested a few films in comparison). I see the grain of all 120 film I tried with my LS8000 so far so why ask for "improved resolution"? At 4000 dpi 16bit depth time and memory as well as disk space get a bit limiting. For the same price I always get the newer model but if you get a decent discount on the "old" model go for it. The LS8000 offers firewire - I definitively prefer it over USB2 e.g. because of lower processor load while scanning. Yes silverfast is a nice software for this scanner but give vuescan also a try - there is a free test version available. My EU version of the LS8000 came with a full version on silverfast including a 24x36mm IT8 strip.

[peter_weimann1]

Walter: The 9000 is, as the 8000, firewire only connected. Scanning time may be an issue for people who have to scan a lot with little sparetime. The 9000 suffers of the banding problem as well as the 8000. At least when you lighten up the shadow areas slightly you will see it occasionally. The 9000 has the "Kodachrome" setting which is important for me. The 9000 has a visible improvement in overall image quality.

Just my 2 cent.

[jtk]

9000 has Ice 4 and 8000 doesn't, right?

 

Ice 4 (a combo of new software and new hardware Vs Ice 3)is a big plus for the current 35mm Nikons (5000 and V) over the older ones (IV and 4000).

 

Mid and low settings in Ice 4 (and Vuescan) don't reduce sharpness at all whereas 3 does with older Nikons (and undoubtedly with Minolta).

 

Ice 4 is also why the newer machines dust Kodachrome perfectly SOMETIMES, ie with maybe 1/3 in my vintage KII and K14 (60s-80s). Your milage will vary.

 

I'm guessing this is an argument for 9000 Vs 8000, but mainly for 35mm with those machines.

[walterh]

Peter thanks for pointing out the firewire connection. Seems I picked up the wrong info.