Nikon Coolscan 4000 v. 5000

I'm planning on buying a new film scanner and was going to go with the Nikon Coolscan 5000, but a

friend has offered me a good deal on a very lightly used Coolscan 4000.

 

In use, does the 5000 offer a real advantage in image quality over the 4000? How about speed of

operation? FWIW, I scan primarily negatives. Thanks!

I had a 4000 but upgraded to a 9000 so I could scan MF in addition to 35mm. A few of

the differences are: 4000 max is 14bit while the 5000 is 16bit. I recall that the 4000 can't

use the latest Nikon Scan software, so you'll be stuck with older software which may or

may not work with your current OS, (I use MacOSX 10.4). Of course you could use the

excellent Vuescan but would not have the benefit of Digital ICE, GEM, & ROC. If you are

only scanning B+W then Digital ICE, GEM, etc. are of no use as they only work with color

negs or slides. I found the 16bit, newer software to be a benefit.

 

If this is your first film scanner and you are getting a good deal then the 4000 might be

the thing for you. You can always sell it and buy a 5000 later on.

I have both scanners but rarely use the 4000.

 

The 5000 is almost twice as fast but more important it can use the latest version of Digital Ice (4?) Dust and scratch removal on Kodachrome.

 

If you use Ice dust and scratch removal on "Kodachrome slides" with the 4000, there's a significant lost of detail.

 

If you have lots of Kodachrome slide film to scan, I'd avoid the 4000.

 

Otherwise the 4000 is a great machine.

 

4000 also needs a firewire port. 5000 uses USB.

"4000 max is 14bit while the 5000 is 16bit"

 

I don't think anyone has demonstrated any real world examples showing a difference in performance due to the higher bit depth. For color negatives, the issue is *completely* moot.

I have both, and use them both to save time when I have a lot of scanning to do. For colour negatives there isn't a significant difference in quality. The latest Nikonscan software works with the 4000 (I use Windows XP), but the 'DEE' part of ICE4 is disabled (highlight and shadow 'enhancement'). I don't find DEE to be much use anyway. GEM works with silver-image B&W if you scan in RGB, but the results are often unappealing.

 

Best, Helen

I found a significant improvement in the C41 scan quality going from LS-4000 to LS-5000. Less grainy scans with the same settings. The ICE4 in LS-5000 is a big improvement over that in the LS-4000.

 

At least on Windows, LS-4000 can be operated using the latest version of Nikon Scan. To do this, you need to upgrade the firmware of the scanner (have done that, it's easy).

 

I think the 5000 is a much better scanner.

Does 4000 have the 4th light?

Ilkka sold me on trading up from my 4000 to a 5000 and while I was skeptical, I have been very pleased. Also it's a lot faster. DEE is not that relevant for me though.