If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.
I have a 4870 with the factory holders (not the best there are). I found it to render reasonable quality scans in 120. Fujichrome Velvia and Provia come out in both resolution and color outstanding (my standards, of course) but color negative may have an edge in aproaching dmin and dmax. B&W not hard to scan due to the difused light source.
I thought about a Nikon 9000. The price, a little steep, especially since I rarely shoot film now.
I was thinking on upgrading to the 700 and doing fluid scans.
ScanScience has an inexpensive fluid system for the 7xx series.
You could buy secondhand. I bought a Minolta scan multipro this way and I'm very pleased with it. I scan transparencies mostly. I could compare it on 35mm with a Nikon 4000ED and whilst the Nikon was very good I preferred the Minolta, it seemed to give more detail. On 120 the scans are very good for the sizes I print which is up to 17" x 22", and they could go bigger I think.
I use the Nikon LS9000ED dedicated film scanner. For 6x6 @ 4000 ppi, you'll get a file about 230 MB's, including the black border area. Once you crop out this area, you'll have a file somewhere around 195 MB. This will yield a 24 x 24 print about 345 ppi, and a very slight s&ling will bring you up to 360 ppi - ideal for Epson printers.
Here's a recent scan I made from Fuji Reala color negative film using a 501 CM and 40mm CF Distagon.
It was a toss up between an older Imacon or a new Epson v750 - what nailed it for me was the bundled SilverFast Ai scanner software.
Epson have made a few errors though : dont even bother attempting to calibrate with the third party IT8 target (as supplied by Epson as its very difficult to locate the required reference files that are recognised after the software becomes updated - groan ) I would strongly suggest that one should purchase The SilverFast IT8 BARCODED targets as an extra instead.
I scan individual monochrome negatives (C-41 process 6x6 cm film) on the 6400 dpi setting (which uses the higher quality lens) with the original film holder / located the sweetest spot via trail and error. I also obessively dust the scanner bed and negs with a very large blower brush before starting !!
My scanned Files are approx 1 GB in size (Greyscale 16 Bit). I use the scanner on the FW400 interface !!
The quality seems more than ok for my application of image proofing !!
The Epson 750 will do quite well for a number of applications.
Keep in mind the promised 6400 dpi setting is nowhere in sight when checked effectively..
Do not let that bother you and enjoy your new scanner.
Many forum users employ one and enjoy its results.
Simply hire heavier artillery on a need to use basis if ever that comes up.
Thank your for your kind reply and much appreciated expertise
I am considering purchasing an older Imacon scanner - Is it possibe to use an older Imacon scanner successfully with an adapter to convert the older SCSI interface connecter to a FireWire interface (that will work flawlessly with my Mac running OSX 10.4.11) ?
There is another forum user who employs this older Imacon scanner with excellent results.
Peter even reserves a dedicated Mac G4 for this purpose.
As far as I understood from him there is no way to convert the SCSI interface to FireWire.
We have to accept that time flies faster in the digital age.
Ten years is a life span that will seldom be reached for high grade digital products.
The curve is beginning to grow less steep but it will not likely reach the level that we know for film cameras.
As long as the motion picture industry does not have enough funds to switch to digital we do not have to fear film will become unavailable.
Hollywood may be moving towards digital as can be witnessed from the cameras supplied by RED for motion pictures.
The theatres are not able to do the investment needed to show digitally recorded films.
It is a strange world where lack of finance for one industry saves the users of film for the next few years anyway.
If the worst comes to the worst there is still hope.
Well over 25 years after the introduction of the best improvement in sound carriers, if you believe what marketing people said about the CD, there is still a market for good old LP records.
It is quite small but very healthy.
The one large plant in Germany where records are still being pressed has a healthy order book. They can hardly cope with demand.
Apparently not everybody is convinced that new is better.
I have heard rumors that Nikon is going out of the scanner business soon. The Nikon 9000ED is a terrific scanner for 120 film (and 35mm) and I can also recommend the Epson 750. Get the Nikons while you can.
Nikon has stopped making the 9000 scanner.
There is still new stock available but no more of these excellent scanners will be produced.
That is what a large specilist trader in scanners told me a few weeks ago.
Well, from what I hear, Nikon is continuing manufacture & delivery of the 9000ED scanner. I had called them a few weeks ago to the afirmative. The rep indicated that there were tremendously backlogged but are filling orders to stores. I waited three weeks and got mine yesterday from Calumet Photo.
I don't know how reliable the review is, but at B&H, which recently got these units back in stock, a reviewer reports that Nikon does not support more recent versions of Mac OSX (from v10.4 on). The reviewer claimed that the scanner simply doesn't work unless one buys 3 party software at ca. $400 US. This may not be a problem if you are using Windows.
I know this is quite an old post, but just to correct the information. Here is my experience:
The Nikon 9000ED or LS as I think it´s named in some parts of the world, work just fine with Mac OSX 10.6.7 and Nikon scan 4. The only fault I have found, is that the scanner need to be connected and switched on, before you switch on your computer.
And the result is very pleasing. Both with 24*36 and 6*6.
In a lot of ways that's actually better than a film scanner and it's magnitudes faster.
The only problem with doing it your way is that there's a possibility of more dust on the negative/slide. However, that could be the case with scanning too, but there's digital ICE to help in those cases.