How does the LS-2000 Nikon stack up against new flatbeds with filmloaders?

I like my venerable old scanjet4c and nikon ls-2000 scanners, but am a
little tired of wrestling with the monsterous SCSI cables every time I
want to relocate them or upgrade my pc. With most of the new flatbeds
offering film scanning I am tempted to switch to one of these slick usb
connected units..

I see that some of the new flatbeds seem to have more/better options
when it comes to scanning film now, for example the Epson 3590 on the
low end or the higher 4990 and V700. Will these scan my 35mm neg's as
good or close to as good and my LS-2000? One advantage would be that I
could also scan my 120 neg's as well.



tia

Yes and no.
I have a Canoscan 4000 and an Epson 4180. Compared side by side the scans
from the dedicated 35mmCanon film scanner are usually better-I do not use
the flat bed for scanning 35mm film so I guess that answers that question.
However if I had only the Epson flat bed I would be satisfied with the
majority of 35mm scans I got from it and could tweak the rest. I have only
ever scanned medium format film on flat bed scanners and the results for my
puproses have been excellent. One big issue with most flatbed scanners is
keeping the film flat against the glass during scanning. Many people,
including moi. resort to a piece of glass over the film.
If you are a dedicated 35 film user your best bet would be to upgrade to a
newer Nikon film scanner now while they are still available.

On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 21:44:53 GMT, "bmoag" <aetoo@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Yes and no.
>I have a Canoscan 4000 and an Epson 4180. Compared side by side the scans
>from the dedicated 35mmCanon film scanner are usually better-I do not use
>the flat bed for scanning 35mm film so I guess that answers that question.
>However if I had only the Epson flat bed I would be satisfied with the
>majority of 35mm scans I got from it and could tweak the rest. I have only
>ever scanned medium format film on flat bed scanners and the results for my
>puproses have been excellent. One big issue with most flatbed scanners is
>keeping the film flat against the glass during scanning. Many people,
>including moi. resort to a piece of glass over the film.
>If you are a dedicated 35 film user your best bet would be to upgrade to a
>newer Nikon film scanner now while they are still available.


I think it's down to where the newest Epsons (V700 and V750)
now match the 2700 dpi dedicated film scanners from around five
or six years ago - when the LS-2000 and the Polaroid SprintScan Plus
ruled the roost.

This is still a good notch below what you'll get from a good
dedicated current-model 4000 or 5400 dpi film scanner from
any of the major brands.

photo-i has some comparisons of the V750 versus a Nikon
LS-9000 here: <http://www.photo-i.co.uk>


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com

www.photo-i.co.uk

for direct comparison between the V700/750 and one of the Nikons



Raphael Bustin wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 21:44:53 GMT, "bmoag" <aetoo@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Yes and no.
>>I have a Canoscan 4000 and an Epson 4180. Compared side by side the scans
>
>>from the dedicated 35mmCanon film scanner are usually better-I do not use
>
>>the flat bed for scanning 35mm film so I guess that answers that question.
>>However if I had only the Epson flat bed I would be satisfied with the
>>majority of 35mm scans I got from it and could tweak the rest. I have only
>>ever scanned medium format film on flat bed scanners and the results for my
>>puproses have been excellent. One big issue with most flatbed scanners is
>>keeping the film flat against the glass during scanning. Many people,
>>including moi. resort to a piece of glass over the film.
>>If you are a dedicated 35 film user your best bet would be to upgrade to a
>>newer Nikon film scanner now while they are still available.
>
>
>
> I think it's down to where the newest Epsons (V700 and V750)
> now match the 2700 dpi dedicated film scanners from around five
> or six years ago - when the LS-2000 and the Polaroid SprintScan Plus
> ruled the roost.
>
> This is still a good notch below what you'll get from a good
> dedicated current-model 4000 or 5400 dpi film scanner from
> any of the major brands.
>
> photo-i has some comparisons of the V750 versus a Nikon
> LS-9000 here: <http://www.photo-i.co.uk>
>
>
> rafe b
> www.terrapinphoto.com

TG wrote:
> I like my venerable old scanjet4c and nikon ls-2000 scanners, but am a
> little tired of wrestling with the monsterous SCSI cables every time I
> want to relocate them or upgrade my pc. With most of the new flatbeds
> offering film scanning I am tempted to switch to one of these slick usb
> connected units..
>
> I see that some of the new flatbeds seem to have more/better options
> when it comes to scanning film now, for example the Epson 3590 on the
> low end or the higher 4990 and V700. Will these scan my 35mm neg's as
> good or close to as good and my LS-2000? One advantage would be that I
> could also scan my 120 neg's as well.
>
>
>
> tia

I have an LS2000 and a new V700, the LS2000 may be basnished to the
closet. The LS2000 is marginally sharper than the V700 but does not
have near the dynamic range. The V700 is faster too, don't have the
bulk loader for the Nikon so 12 slides at a time is good enough for
what I have to do. My only gripe about the V700 is that it is not built
as well as the Epson Expression 1600 it replaced, has a plastic feel.

Tom