Scanner choice - Nikon Coolscan 4000 ED vs Epson V600

[julien_boudreau]

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>I've been hesitating on purchasing a scanner for a while now. I started B&W photography about a year ago, and took a darkroom course at the university. It was amazing, and I will be renting the darkroom periodically. I shoot 35mm for the most part, and even in the DR, I print 5X7.5 on 11X14 paper. This being said, the bulk of my scanning will be 35mm. I intend to use it to "proof" rolls, some small prints (5X7.5) and some web uploads such as flickr.</p>

<p>This being said, I have a few options. Someone is selling a Nikon Coolscan 4000 ED locally for $450. I can't find much information on the product, as it's a bit dated. My other option is an Epson V500 or V600 (I don't really see the value of the V700 at this point).</p>

<p>What would be the better scanner for 35mm negs? If I eventually move to MF (very close to ordering a 500 C/M), would this change?</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>J</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>$450 is a good price for an LS-4000, if you can find one. It sold new for about $1000. There's not much to wear out. If you plan to stay with film, scanning is the best way to go, and the LS-4000 is one of the best.</p>

<p>The Nikon LS-4000 is nearly identical to the newer LS-5000. It is designed for 35mm negatives and slides, and scans at 4000 pixels/inch at 14 bits/channel. It has at least twice the resolution of the V600 (or V700), and is grain-sharp throught the frame. You would need a larger scanner for 120 film, such as the LS-8000 or newer LS-9000. Unfortunately, Nikon has ended all scanner production for low interest and sales.</p>

<p>For proofing only? You will find that prints made from scans are sharper and have better color than any done in the darkroom. It also works very well for black and white. That's why darkroom equipment is seldom used any more.</p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>Well the difference between the two scanners isn't quite as much as the difference between a vga web cam with dog drool on the lens compared to a newer D3x with a 105 2.5 lens, but it's getting close. :)</p>

<p>Yes you'll need a different scanner for medium format, but flat beds really don't cut it for 35mm film.</p>

<p> </p>

[julien_boudreau]

<p>So the 4000 ED it is? Is this the same as the LS-4000? It's in perfect condition, and he only used it twice.</p>

<p>J</p>

[blumesan]

<p>The 4000 ED is a significant improvement over the LS-4000. And at that price it is an outright steal. </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>The LS-4000 was only offered as the ED version. It is the same thing, I just omitted the "ED" for brevity. The lower model was known as the Coolscan IV or LS-40 (also an "ED" scanner).</p>

[robert lee]

<p>Get the 4000 for sure. The flatbed is worthwhile as well, but not at retail prices. It's 135 format now, but you'll be shooting 120 film before you know it. It's a natural progression given how cheap MF gear is. </p>

<p>Keep an eye on the Epson outlet site. V600 class scanners comes up once in awhile for around $50.</p>

[julien_boudreau]

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>I mostly shoot street, but love "moody" atmospheric nature shots as well, which is really where I believe MF will come in for me. I had a 500 C/M shipped from KEH last month but there were problems with it so I returned it. Right now I'm saving for an M6 and 50mm Summicron, and THEN I'll get the 500 C/M. I currently shoot with a Nikon FM2n and love it, but on a few occasions I could have used a quieter shutter and 1/15s.</p>

<p>A few of us are also planning on building a darkroom. Also, once a year for a period of 3 months I will pay for access to the university darkroom (open studio). There's nothing like a good fiber print in my opinion.</p>

<p>But for 35mm scans, I think the 4000 ED is the way to go from what I've been reading and the advice on here. Down the road maybe I'll get a flatbed for MF.</p>

<p>I'm not sure if I can use a firewire however...</p>

<p>J</p>

[richard__]

<p>The scanner should come with a firewire card. If it doesn't, you can use any firewire 400 card that you can install in your computer to directly make the connection. A 800 firewire port would need a 400/800 cable, which should work too because it does for me on my macbook pro.</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>for small proofs and web uploads...... save your money maybe and pickup a cheap v500 as they have been replaced by v600 put the money you save towards your M6..... The Nikon is worth it but only if you will use it for more than small proofs and web uploads...... I can do web uploads and small prints easily witha v500..... heres a web upload for you.....</p><div></div>

[mattb1]

<p>Well, get the Nikon, it will save you a lot of time and is capable of capturing great resolution. But, you will find out that scanning to judge the merits of a frame off of a film strip is not much of a time saver. It takes skill and time to scan well enough to judge a photo, and once you have done that you also have a file that is almost ready to print.</p>

<p>Dark rooms are cool and somewhat magical, but to be honest you will produce better results with a digital darkroom. You will also poison yourself less, the chemicals are somewhat toxic. </p>

<p>It is easy to dismiss any thing digital as soul less and devoid of craft, but in reality there is just as much craft (or more) in the digital world and a whole lot more tools and possibilities that are accessible to a lot more people. IMO get the Nikon and get a photo editor rather than a wet darkroom.</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>Dark rooms are cool and somewhat magical, but to be honest you will produce better results with a digital darkroom. You will also poison yourself less, the chemicals are somewhat toxic.<br>

Or maybe not......</p>

[ed_nsb]

<p>Nikon actually made decision to drop the line because of the number of repairs to the auto feeder. This was and is a great scanner for 35mm. You may have software version issues but they can be fixed by purchasing vuescan. </p>