So in the end (Minolta 5400)...

[Fernando]

....after digging through countless posts, opinions, comparisons, etc.;
after reading the very interesting Scanner Bakeoff by Jim Hutchinson;
after hours of Franklin +/- charts...

I need some more opinions from experienced owners.

I have to side my Polaroid SS120 with a better quality scanner for
35mm. I shoot mostly BW neg film (TMax 100) and slides (Sensia-II 100,
Provia 400F, Astia100F pushed 1 stop, Velvia100F).
I highly value resolution power (my SS120 is lacking in the
department) and ability to read as much clean shadow details as
possible (my SS120 rulez the world in the department).
Good Vuescan support is a plus.
I don't care about speed, batch scans, APS, bulk, and so on.

My candidates are the Minolta SE 5400, and the Nikon Coolscan LS-50.
Where I live, there's no much price difference between the two (about
15%).
I cound not find any good comparison between those two scanners; I
have to say, that film scanners don't seem to draw much attention
nowadays... <:-}

So, any kind soul feels like giving his opinion/reporting his
experiences?

Many thanks,

Fernando

 

[Robert Feinman]

...after digging through countless posts, opinions, comparisons, etc.;
after reading the very interesting Scanner Bakeoff by Jim Hutchinson;
after hours of Franklin +/- charts...

I need some more opinions from experienced owners.

I have to side my Polaroid SS120 with a better quality scanner for
35mm. I shoot mostly BW neg film (TMax 100) and slides (Sensia-II 100,
Provia 400F, Astia100F pushed 1 stop, Velvia100F).
I highly value resolution power (my SS120 is lacking in the
department) and ability to read as much clean shadow details as
possible (my SS120 rulez the world in the department).
Good Vuescan support is a plus.
I don't care about speed, batch scans, APS, bulk, and so on.

My candidates are the Minolta SE 5400, and the Nikon Coolscan LS-50.
Where I live, there's no much price difference between the two (about
15%).
I cound not find any good comparison between those two scanners; I
have to say, that film scanners don't seem to draw much attention
nowadays... <:-}

So, any kind soul feels like giving his opinion/reporting his
experiences?

Many thanks,

Fernando

I find that you can get sharp 18x enlargements for 300dpi printed
output from the Minolta 5400. You can see the results in the tips
section of my web site.
That will be more than most 35mm films can realistically be expected
to yield under most normal shooting conditions. Misfocusing, camera
shake, film and lens limitations usually keep the maximum degree
of enlargement to about 10x.

 

[Fernando]

I find that you can get sharp 18x enlargements for 300dpi printed
output from the Minolta 5400. You can see the results in the tips
section of my web site.

Yes, thanks; I have no doubts about 5400's performances in the
resolving power department.
What I fear about this model, is actual dynamic range and shadow
noise.
New positive films get extremely dense in dark areas, and it seems
that the 5400 may have troubles both in extracting details from dense
areas, and in having clean shadows (banding, noise, etc.).
Which is your experience about that?

Thank you!

Fernando

 

[Robert Feinman]

Yes, thanks; I have no doubts about 5400's performances in the
resolving power department.
What I fear about this model, is actual dynamic range and shadow
noise.
New positive films get extremely dense in dark areas, and it seems
that the 5400 may have troubles both in extracting details from dense
areas, and in having clean shadows (banding, noise, etc.).
Which is your experience about that?

Thank you!

Fernando

The problem with dark areas is that very few bits are used to represent
the change in density. So a change from value 1 to value 2 is 50%!. This
means that if you try to do any large scale adjustments you may find all
the problems you mentioned. I have a short discussion of this online as
well. The best one can hope for is that there is sufficient dynamic
range in the scanner that you can set the black point to around 30 or so
and thus avoid the worst values. Is it possible you are underexposing
your slides?
I've started to use color negative film more frequently since it can
capture a wider scene brightness and its low contrast is easier to scan.
With the photo editor most color film characteristics such as color
balance or contrast can be emulated.
You can also try multiscanning which will reduce the noise in the dark
areas but won't solve the lack of bits problem.

 

[Olaf Ulrich]

I shoot mostly BW neg film [...] and slides
[...]. I highly value resolution power [...]
and ability to read as much clean shadow
details as possible [...]. Good Vuescan
support is a plus. I don't care about speed,
batch scans, APS, bulk, and so on.
My candidates are the Minolta SE 5400
and the Nikon Coolscan LS-50.

I recommend the Minolta. It has better Dmax than the
Nikon and scans negatives much better, in particular
B/W negatives.

The Nikon is faster, particularly when comparing the
speeds with Digital ICE engaged. With colour slides,
it is said to be sharper but only by a small margin (well,
you saw the results of Jim Hutchinson's Scanner Bake-
off ...).

When the ability to scan negatives is high on your list
then get the Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400.
Banding often is reported a problem with this model---
but I bought mine (after contemplating the Coolscan)
new in January 2004 and I use it with Minolta's
DiMAGE Scan Utility 1.1.3 with no problems.
Earlier versions of Scan Utility (and the scanner firm-
ware that comes with it) used to cause banding and
streaking under certain circumstances which however
was a software/firmware problem now cured.

Some say SilverFast 6.2 Ai will exploit the Minolta's
hardware capabilities to the best ... but as of now, I
am quite happy with Scan Utility.

Olaf

 

[Fernando]

I recommend the Minolta. It has better Dmax than the
Nikon and scans negatives much better, in particular
B/W negatives.

The Nikon is faster, particularly when comparing the
speeds with Digital ICE engaged. With colour slides,
it is said to be sharper but only by a small margin (well,
you saw the results of Jim Hutchinson's Scanner Bake-
off ...).

When the ability to scan negatives is high on your list
then get the Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400.
Banding often is reported a problem with this model---
but I bought mine (after contemplating the Coolscan)
new in January 2004 and I use it with Minolta's
DiMAGE Scan Utility 1.1.3 with no problems.
Earlier versions of Scan Utility (and the scanner firm-
ware that comes with it) used to cause banding and
streaking under certain circumstances which however
was a software/firmware problem now cured.

Many thanks!
This was the reply I was hoping for. It seems that Vuescan still has
issues with this model (I love Vuescan, particularly because it runs
on Linux), but if it works OK with Minolta Scan Utility and
Silverfast, then I'll bite and scan under Windows... another question,
please: did you find Grain Dissolver, Multisampling and ICE actually
useful features?

Thanks again!

Fernando

 

[Fernando]

The problem with dark areas is that very few bits are used to represent
the change in density. So a change from value 1 to value 2 is 50%!. This

Robert, this is the same with just any scanner (and digital camera as
well): still, my SS120 manages to extract an amazing amount of clean
details from even the densest shadows. And it does not even have
multisampling.
I was trying to infer if the SE5400 has a similar (useable) dynamic
range as the Coolscan LS-50, with all the messages about streaking,
banding and so on (never read about similar problems from LS-50
users).
I had a bad experience with my previous Minolta Scan Dual III, which
exhibited visible noise and streaking in dark areas... don't want to
see this again.

Thanks anyway,

Fernando

 

[Olaf Ulrich]

... another question, please: did you find
Grain Dissolver, Multisampling and ICE
actually useful features?

Yes, I do. However, there are a few caveats.

First of all, you cannot use Digital ICE without Grain
Dissolver---at least not with Scan Utility. Whenever
you switch on ICE then the Grain Dissolver inevitably
gets engaged as well. I was told that SilverFast can
engage and disengage the two features independently
of each other.

Note that in Scan Utility you can use Grain Dissolver
without ICE---but not ICE without Grain Dissolver.
This is particularly useful when scanning conventional
B/W film where Digital ICE cannot be used.

The good thing about this is: using Digital ICE with
Grain Dissolver makes perfect sense. By the way,
the Grain Dissolver does not actually 'dissolve' or
remove the grain but makes it smoother, cleaner,
more harmonious and even. The grain remains visible
but it looks better. The difference between with and
without Grain Dissolver is similar to an enlarger with
light diffuser and one with condensing lens. Also see:

<http://scanhancer.iddo.nl/index.php>

(This is where Grain Dissolver originally comes from.)

The bad thing about this is: using Digital ICE slows
down the scanner; using Grain Dissolver also slows
down the scanner; using both features at the same
time slows down the scanner very much!

I used multi-sampling only once yet, and I think it
does improve shadow details by a small margin.
However, it increases scanning time by a very big
margin so I have not yet conducted a formal com-
parison test with and without multi-sampling (I
really should do that soon ...). Usually, shadow
details are good enough for me with single-pass.
You can choose between single, 2x, 4x, 8x, and
16x. The scanner will scan each line the appro-
priate number of times before advancing the film
holder to the next scan line.

Olaf

 

[Wilfred]

Yes, I do. However, there are a few caveats.

First of all, you cannot use Digital ICE without Grain
Dissolver---at least not with Scan Utility. Whenever
you switch on ICE then the Grain Dissolver inevitably
gets engaged as well. I was told that SilverFast can
engage and disengage the two features independently
of each other

VueScan can do this, too. However, with my DSE 5400, VueScan's IR
cleaning (=implementation of ICE) doesn't work very well.

 

[Alan Browne]

The problem with dark areas is that very few bits are used to represent
the change in density. So a change from value 1 to value 2 is 50%!. This
means that if you try to do any large scale adjustments you may find all
the problems you mentioned. I have a short discussion of this online as
well. The best one can hope for is that there is sufficient dynamic
range in the scanner that you can set the black point to around 30 or so
and thus avoid the worst values. Is it possible you are underexposing
your slides?
I've started to use color negative film more frequently since it can
capture a wider scene brightness and its low contrast is easier to scan.
With the photo editor most color film characteristics such as color
balance or contrast can be emulated.
You can also try multiscanning which will reduce the noise in the dark
areas but won't solve the lack of bits problem.

In my experience the easeist film to scan is Kodak Portra 160NC.

Sensia is very cooperative.

 

[Alan Browne]

Many thanks!
This was the reply I was hoping for. It seems that Vuescan still has
issues with this model (I love Vuescan, particularly because it runs
on Linux), but if it works OK with Minolta Scan Utility and
Silverfast, then I'll bite and scan under Windows... another question,
please: did you find Grain Dissolver, Multisampling and ICE actually
useful features?

ICE is prICEless... well, at least it reduces a lot of labour.

Multisampling provides marginal noise improvement up to 4 passes.
Beyond that it provides no benefit that I can see. Others may
disagree.

Grain disolver from what I've seen provides marginal improvement
only and softens edges in some areas. I don't use it. Some
people have bought 3rd party s/w for grain reduction. (I haven't
bought one yet).

Cheers,
Alan

 

[Fernando]

Hello Alan!

Thanks for your reply:

ICE is prICEless... well, at least it reduces a lot of labour.

Multisampling provides marginal noise improvement up to 4 passes.
Beyond that it provides no benefit that I can see. Others may
disagree.

Grain disolver from what I've seen provides marginal improvement
only and softens edges in some areas. I don't use it.

So I assume you're not using Minolta Scan Utility, right? It does not
allow to turn off Grain Dissolver if you want ICE.

Thanks again!

Fernando

 

[Olaf Ulrich]

Grain Dissolver from what I've seen provides
marginal improvement only and softens edges
in some areas. I don't use it.

The Grain Dissolver's effect is subtle but fine. I don't see
any softening of edges. In fact, Digital ICE softens edges
very slightly, and Grain Dissolver reduces that unwanted
side effect. I use it routinely.

Some people have bought 3rd-party
software for grain reduction.

No software for grain reduction or noise reduction can
compete with Minolta's Grain Dissolver hardware. The
drawback is: Grain Dissolver increases the scan time
considerably. The incorporation of grain reduction
software into your workflow, however, will take even
longer.

Olaf

 

[Bill Tuthill]

Sensia is very cooperative.
In my experience the easiest film to scan is Kodak Portra 160NC.

How about Portra 400UC, or as it's now called, Ultracolor 400?

 

[Alan Browne]

How about Portra 400UC, or as it's now called, Ultracolor 400?

Got some in the fridge, haven't exposed it yet.

 

[Alan Browne]

Hello Alan!

Thanks for your reply:




So I assume you're not using Minolta Scan Utility, right? It does not
allow to turn off Grain Dissolver if you want ICE.

No I use the Minolta Scan U more than Vuescan. But you are
correct that GD is on when ICE is on. I only turn on ICE when I
have a difficult to clean or scratched film. (More the later
than the former).

Cheers,
Alan

 

[Fernando]

The Grain Dissolver's effect is subtle but fine. I don't see
any softening of edges. In fact, Digital ICE softens edges
very slightly, and Grain Dissolver reduces that unwanted
side effect. I use it routinely.




No software for grain reduction or noise reduction can
compete with Minolta's Grain Dissolver hardware. The
drawback is: Grain Dissolver increases the scan time
considerably. The incorporation of grain reduction
software into your workflow, however, will take even
longer.

You guys won me over: ordered a 5400, should arrive tomorrow.
Will see if Vuescan will work OK or if I'll have to resort to Dimage
Scan Utility.
Thanks to you all, and be prepared for additional questions (and some
tests) when I'll have the new toy up&running.

Fernando

 

[Ralf Hartings]

The Grain Dissolver's effect is subtle but fine. I don't see
any softening of edges. In fact, Digital ICE softens edges
very slightly, and Grain Dissolver reduces that unwanted
side effect. I use it routinely.





No software for grain reduction or noise reduction can
compete with Minolta's Grain Dissolver hardware. The
drawback is: Grain Dissolver increases the scan time
considerably. The incorporation of grain reduction
software into your workflow, however, will take even
longer.

Olaf

Correct, but it doesn't lock you to the PC!
I use the 5400 without Grain Dissolver but with ICE in Vuescan in batch
mode in Linux.
Then I run NeatImage (also in Linux, using wine!) to remove the noise.
This gives me very short scanning time, short "PC-sitting-time" and very
good scans!

Ralf Hartings
Sweden

 

[Fernando]

You guys won me over: ordered a 5400, should arrive tomorrow.
Will see if Vuescan will work OK or if I'll have to resort to Dimage
Scan Utility.
Thanks to you all, and be prepared for additional questions (and some
tests) when I'll have the new toy up&running.

Ok, here we are!
5400 up'n'running, tried Vuescan 8.0.6 and Minolta Scan Utility 1.1.5.
First impressions: the scanner is very, very slow with my typical
settings (5400 dpi, 4x multisampling, ICE), expecially with Scan
Utility for it engages the Grain Dissolver with ICE... not a big
problem for me, anyway.
Vuescan just can't drive it to its maximum capabilities: streaking in
the shadows (it even streaks with BW neg films, on dense areas), even
with repeated calibrations, odd color casts when pushing the RGB
exposure, and so (and yes, I profiled the scanner for my slides with
various Wolf Faust IT8 targets).
A pity, for it's quite faster in focusing and allows for good IR
cleaning (I use Light cleaning) without grain dissolver.
By the way, I found g.d. to soften details considerabily, in a way I
cannot fully recover by sharpening. So when I resort to Dimage Scan
Utility (dense originals), I can't use ICE. Very frustrating.
Moreover, Scan Utility does crash occasionally, expecially when used
at 5400dpi with 4x engaged.
I'll download and try Silverfast 6 Demo: if it works, it's a must have
for me: we'll see.

I really love the film holders of the 5400. Smart, well built, easy to
use. Wish my SS120 had similarly-good ones...

Now, the questions:

1) I can't find a reason for the manual focus knob. Any situation
where you found it useful?
2) How can I check the firmware version of the scanner?
3) It becomes quite warm after some use. Much more than my SS120.
Yours, too?

Bye!

Fer

 

[Robert Feinman]

Ok, here we are!
5400 up'n'running, tried Vuescan 8.0.6 and Minolta Scan Utility 1.1.5.
First impressions: the scanner is very, very slow with my typical
settings (5400 dpi, 4x multisampling, ICE), expecially with Scan
Utility for it engages the Grain Dissolver with ICE... not a big
problem for me, anyway.
Vuescan just can't drive it to its maximum capabilities: streaking in
the shadows (it even streaks with BW neg films, on dense areas), even
with repeated calibrations, odd color casts when pushing the RGB
exposure, and so (and yes, I profiled the scanner for my slides with
various Wolf Faust IT8 targets).
A pity, for it's quite faster in focusing and allows for good IR
cleaning (I use Light cleaning) without grain dissolver.
By the way, I found g.d. to soften details considerabily, in a way I
cannot fully recover by sharpening. So when I resort to Dimage Scan
Utility (dense originals), I can't use ICE. Very frustrating.
Moreover, Scan Utility does crash occasionally, expecially when used
at 5400dpi with 4x engaged.
I'll download and try Silverfast 6 Demo: if it works, it's a must have
for me: we'll see.

I really love the film holders of the 5400. Smart, well built, easy to
use. Wish my SS120 had similarly-good ones...

Now, the questions:

1) I can't find a reason for the manual focus knob. Any situation
where you found it useful?
2) How can I check the firmware version of the scanner?
3) It becomes quite warm after some use. Much more than my SS120.
Yours, too?

Bye!

Fer

Unless you have very unusual requirements I don't think you really
need to oversample. Also cleaning is not needed unless you have
dirty originals.
Just make sure you use 16 bit depth. Try a couple of scans with
1x sampling, no gd and no cleaning and compare them to what you
are doing. I doubt you'll see much difference.
Lastly unless you are planning to make 18x enlargements or cropping
a lot you can scan at a lower resolution.
Downsampling in your image editor or the scanner produce about the
same result and the editing goes a lot faster on smaller files.
If you do sample at less than 5400 try to use a submultiple like
2700 or the scanning software will have to do lots of calculations.