Review 1 of 6
Price Paid:
$1900.00
from B+H Summary: Bought it when it was brand new in the late 90s - just replaced the original 35 model. It was expensive then, but this was before the days of digital cams, and I had to crank out scans of slides at night after shooting and picking up film in the labs. spent many sleepless nights with this thing and it paid for itself many times over, even given the ridiculous price I paid back then (well, that was when a dinky Mac G3 laptop cost me $4500 and that was the only way to run photoshop and a SCSI scanner reliably on the road back then...)
Anyway - over the years it has somehow become a pain to use it under XP, and the scans it makes now lack color depth or even proper color balance. I've swapped the lamp for the backup unit and that didn't change a thing. so it's time to retire it and hope for a good deal on a more recent Nikon unit.
The scans it did at the time were fantastic. See them here - just about everything on these galleries past 1996 was done on the 35Plus
Here's some of the better scans
http://www.speedcenter.com/gallery/gallery99/best_of_1999/index.html
Strengths: shadow detail was better than the competing Nikon units at the time, but it still didn't come anywhere near a drum scan. Any image I sold to advertisers at the time had to be scanned at the local lab on a Scitex or sent to a shop in Chicago to get a huge drum scan made, even if only printed in 2x1" size. Guess things have really changed since then... Weaknesses: it has lost calibration or the light source is bad, or it is an incompatibility with Photoshop under XP, since I cannot make anything work with it any longer, even though it still scans smoothly and puts out images, but something is really off with the raw scans.
Hey, it's 10+ years old and what piece of hardware do you still use on your computer that was bought in the last century?
Similar Products Used: Nikon Coolscan, several models, older sprintscan 35, etc. Customer Service: never needed it
|