Nikon Coolscan V vs Canon FS4000US

[jean deaux]

I am in need of a new film scanner, as it's time to retire my trusty

old Canon FS2710. I've narrowed my choices down to two: the Canon

FS4000US and the Nikon Coolscan V. I've been researching these

scanners, and can't seem to find any reviews that compares the two.

The Canon seems to have pretty good user feedback, but it's a bit

dated.

 

The specs seem to be pretty comparable between the two (14

bits/channel, 4000dpi, 4.2 dmax,...). One drawback for the Canon is

the slow scan times, but its batch scanning capabilities make up for

its slugishness to some degree. However, the Nikon is only around

$70 more, but If I get the Canon, I'd probably spend around $50 on a

SCSI card and a cable anyways.

 

I primarily want to use the scanner to rescan some slides and archive

my film. I'm planning on scanning a few hundred slides over the

course of several months, and scanning others as needed (I know, the

Nikon 5000 ED with slide feeder sounds great, but I really don't want

to spend that kind of $$$).

 

One other point: I've read that scans of dark Velvia slides from the

Canon suffer from shadow noise (I happen to have lots of dark Velvia--

hmmm, the 48 bit 5000 ED sounds better all the time). Does the same

hold true for the Nikon? or does the Nikon produce less shadow noise?

They're both 42bits, so I imagine they'd be similar.

 

I'd appreciate any help on this topic. I was a click away from

ordering the Canon this evening when I second-guessed my decision.

At this point, I feel like I should have ordered and never looked

back (all this research has given me a major headache!).

 

One final question: ICE vs FARE? advantages/disadvantages of either?

I have very few Kodachromes and even less B&W, so these should not be

considered.

 

Thanks in advance!

[steener]

I own a FS4000US and it has been fantastic for Negatives. Slides pose more of a problem, as you highlight. Have a look at a recent post of mine regarding the Canon slide scanning - Alistair Windsor had some interesting points about improving slide results. I will be trying these out as they make sense to me. However, if you're in a position to buy either and intend to scan slides, I would suggest the Nikon. I've only tried the Coolscan 9000 ($$££) in a library, but the Nikon View 4 software is certainly better than Canon's Filmget (supplied with FS4000US) and I think its dynamic range is better than the Canon (crucial for Velvia). The DEE feature also works well for extracting detail from shadow areas. The USB 1.1 limitation of the Canon is also a tad annoying.

[marc_bergman1]

Imaging-Resource has a number of <a href="http://www.imaging-resource.com/SCAN1.HTM">scanner reviews</a>.

[jean deaux]

Thanks for the responses.

 

Matt- I really do want the Nikon 9000, but if I get that, then I'd have to purchase the slide feeder as well, which is way too much money for my budget.

 

Marc- Thanks for the link, but I'd already read that review. And at nearly 3 years old, the review is quite dated. I'm actually seeking more recent information.

 

Anyone else have any experience/info with these scanners?

[peter_phan]

I have the Canon FS4000. I also got a SCSI card for it, which greatly speeds things up. Without it, things were agravatingly slow. I chose the FS4000 for its batch scanning capabilities (I had tons of slides to scan) and FARE. I haven't kept up to date on scanning technology, but at the time I was shopping for a scanner, Canon's FARE did a better job than Nikon's ICE, without losing as much detail.