rob t.

I have a 1280 and I love it. However, I should state that I use it solely for B&W printing using the MIS UT2 inkset, with a CFS system.

Their are curves made specifically for the 1280 using the UT2 inks that allow you to get prints anywhere from somewhat cool prints, to neutral, "Selenium", to the warmer sepia tones.

The quality using the 1280 is fantastic.

I am sure that the 2200 would give fantastic results as well, but I can't imagine them being much better than what the 1280 does for much less money.

Again, the above only applies to black and white printing.

Good luck.

Emre-

Thanks for your ever so helpful post.

I apologize for asking the question, and failing to "do my homework".

Oh, wait. I guess you didn't answer my question, did you? I am specifically referring to NikonScan 4.0, and you admit that you don't know whether it has this problem.

So, have I really failed to do my homework???

A.J.-

I would also like a copy for creating a frame (like the one you posted a link to) for both CS and Elements.

Much appreciated.

"Nikon Scan clips the highlights on negs and the shadows on tranny - reason enough to use vuescan IMO!."

On what do you base this assertion?

I have been playing with my new Nikon Coolscan V for the past week

or so. I am new to the digital darkroom, and I have been very

impressed so far! I am using a Epson 1280 with the MIS UT2 inks

(CFS) as I still love Black and White photography.

It seems that many people prefer using Vuescan instead of the OEM

software that came with their scanner. I am curious as to what

advantages Vuescan has, particularly vs. Nikon Scan 4.0. Nikon Scan

4.0 does have curves and several other useful tools. So, what

advantages would Vuescan have over Nikon Scan 4.0?

Thanks in advance.

"PS> Please don't try to convine me otherwise"

So, what was the purpose of the post?

Perhaps you should have titled the thread "Digital Printing Non-Believer Unwilling To Listen to Others Opinions" rather than "Skeptic".

I just got my Nikon Coolscan V today and did a few scans.

I must admit that I am very impressed and surprised with just how good ICE technology works (as shown perfectly in the above example).

Very positive first impressions with this scanner!

I went through the exact same decision four weeks ago!

As many others have said, both are great cameras and it comes down largely to ergonomics, and that's something you have to decide on your own after putting both of them through their paces.

I did this, and TO ME, the Nikon F100 had much better ergonomics than the Canon EOS 3, so that was my decision. It is an amazing camera, and I am extremely happy with my decision.

Good luck with your choice, and HAVE FUN!

Beau-

I am also considering the Coolscan V. However, I have read that some people believe that the Nikon units tend to blow out the highlights of B&W film due to their LED light source. Since the vast majority of my scans will be of B&W negatives, this is a concern.

Have you experienced any problems with the highlights being blown out with the Nikon scanner?