- auto focus
- quality of scans
- well-designed film holders
- speed
- compact size
- ease of use
- great value for money
- no glass = less dust

The scanner would freeze occasionally with my older system, back when I first bough it (windows xp, 1,2 ghz processor, 512ram, 125mb graphics card, USB1.1) a problem that has been mentioned by other users. It required me to restart the scanning software and unplug the device from the mains which obviously distorted the workflow and was highly annoying.

After years of use my impression is that the system requirements quoted by the manufacturer were too low. I have experienced no problems at all with faster computers, including winxp, 2ghz processor, 2gb ddr ram, 256 grapphics card, USB 2 and now my current win 7 64bit, intel i3, 4gb ram ddr3 and 1gb graphics card,USB 2. The scanner has never frozen and it's faster than ever!

Lack of ICE has never been an issue for me. The bulk of my work consists of traditional BW films where ICE can't be used anyway. As with any scanner, a good anti static brush and air blower definitely save time though!

The year is 2010. I bought the scanner just over 6 years ago and it is still up and running.

The are no problems running it on current OS like vista or Windows 7. I am mainly using Vuescan, which has most up to date drivers for the current systems but have also tried installing Konica-Minolta's software and it's running fine.

I can only say that the scanner is great. I have compared it against my other scanner Epson V700 (with custom film holders) which I bought to scan medium and large format and even though epson is quite a capable scanner, DSIV that clearly shows its superiority by handling shadows better and resolving right up to the grain structure. Given its AF capabilities the sharpness is great with very little or no sharpening necessary in post processing. No problems with curling films, the film holders are really well designed. It's generally a pleasure to use, especially compared to using a flatbed scanner (like v700) where you have to struggle with fiddly film holders, dust on the glass, focus issues and heavy post-processing. KM is quicker, easier to use and gives more consistent results. For 35mm film, where every grain counts, a dedicated film scanner is highly recommended!

Customer Service

not needed

Similar Products Used:

epson v700

I've got nothing good to say about it.

If it would have worked long enough I might have found some.

This was a disaster. The software for this machine went haywire and started to interupt the scan early on. I spent hour and hours with support and downloading and re-downloading software to no avail. I finally found a way around the problem and then the scanner froze up and didn't work at all. Tech help was no help because Konica sold the division that made this beauty to Sony whom had no interest what so ever in repairing it.

I got about a months worth of work on it and about a years worth of headache.

It is no where near worth the risk. I won't buy anything with the Konica name because of this experience. It was a complete disaster.

Customer Service

Was a runaround after a runaround. no one was helpful and they were always pointing their finger in someone elses direction.

Similar Products Used:

Nikon film scanners 4000

- Low price - Fast scans - Good sharpness

- Low dynamic range (actual, not advertised) - may be a problem when scanning slides - Color reproduction could be better - Software hangs up sometimes when autofocusing

I decided to buy this scanner after reading some enthusiastic reviews. But as it happens all the time, you get what you pay for. This scanner has some limitations, that don't allow to use it for a serious photographic work, especially when it comes to scanning slides. Be sure, that your slides are correctly exposed and they don't have dense areas, where you want the details to be still visible. Scanning at 16 bit resolution does not help at all, for this reason, that this particular CCD chip is not capable of producing signal of adequate range, no matter how many bits the following A/D converter may have. Increasing exposure in the software eventually reveals some details, but can wash out the highlights in an ugly way. Much better results could be obtained from negatives, however it is difficult to get rid of a red or magenta cast. Sharpness is quite good. This scanner wins the competition in this field with an obsolete Nikon LS-30 (but not by much). Only very few Velvia slides made with a prime lens show some detail that could not be found on a scan. Dust and small fibres have really sharp edges on a scan! I get occasionally software crash, when I try to use autofocus, no matter where the USB cable is connected in the computer.

Customer Service

?

Similar Products Used:

Nikon LS-30, Canoscan 8400

The scanning software does a good job of letting you get the imgae you want before the scan is made. The histogram and image controls allow you to fine tune your image well. The resolution is great up to about 8x12 or 11x14. I got this scanner mostly because I was scanning slides for small prints and greeting cards. If I want a larger print, I know I will have a drum scan made.

The scanning software can be testy when it comes to installing it. You need to follow the directions exactly.

This is a great film scanner for the price. If you take care to keep your slides/negs clean and learn to use the scanning software and the included Photoshop Elements package to tweak the capabilities, you will get a great image. Combine this with a good photo printer (I have an Epson R300), and you will get fantastic results. Bottom line, take your time, read the scanner manual (especially for installation and startup procedures). I scanned a slide and made a reference print to take to my local custom lab because I wanted them to make a dum scan and print a 16x24 image on their Epson 9600. The owner looked at my slide and looked at my print and was really impressed with the results the combination this scanner and printer produced.

Customer Service

None yet

Similar Products Used:

None