Nikon Coolscan V ED (LS50)

[mike l]

Does any one have any experience with this scanner or know any

reliable reviews? How does it differ from the Nikon Super Coolscan

4000 ED? From what I can see it seems to have a higher technical

spec than the Canon 4000, which is slightly cheaper.

My web site: <a href="http://www.mlpinxit.com ">mlpinxit.com</a>

[teo_emmanuel]

Hi. I'm just abount ready to order this one. I've read from another forum that the French magazine Chasseur d'Images had a side-by-side comparsion between the new Nikons V and 5000 ED, and the Minolta 5400.

"They claimed the 5000 was the best desktop scanner they've ever tested; they even stated it was a pity they don't have a six-star rating to give it. In second place came the Coolscan V; the "old" Coolscan 4000ED and the Minolta 5400 came ex-aequo in third place."

This is what the French mag wrote about the scanner.

I'm wondering if the coolscan V (LS-50) has the same quality as the 5000? Because the price difference is very big and I'm not to concerned about production times.

 

Teo Emmanuel

[ivan_verschoote1]

I've bought one on december 23. Since its my first scanner I've been pretty busy with it during the X-mas holidays. Results are stunning, period. Software is easy to use. The ICE, ROC/GEM and DEE programs perform very good indeed. My first A4 prints couldn't be better, there's no obvious grain and details are remarkable. With DEE you can play with highlights and shadow parts. It simply works great.

Scan times: raw scan = approx 2 minutes. Use of ICE, DEE and ROC doubles the scan time.

Be aware: files are up to 65 MB! You need at least 512MB (I have 768MB) on your Mac (or Pc) to work comfortably.

Only minus: no firewire, just USB 2.0 (or 1.1).

 

Salesman told me than Coolscan 5000 is identical in pure technical performance but it is twice as fast. Price is also twice as high.

Don't hesitate: Nikon has created a new reference to beat.

Ivan

[vesa_perala]

Teo, I'm sure the scanning speed had effect on the total test result but I'd like to know what was the order if only pure scanning quality (and SW feature set) was used to rank those scanners.

 

Vesa

[beau 1664876222]

Can anyone confirm that the performance of the Coolscan V is identical to the 5000 except for its speed? I was about to buy a 5000, but if this is true I might save some money and get the V. I'm sure the 5000 is lightning-fast, but then speed is not exactly a problem for the V if you compare it to the unbearably slow Minoltas or Canons.

[bob_b.]

The specs have the 5000 with a 16bit A/D, where the V has a 14bit converter (although I've seen one site that shows the V with a 16bit A/D also, which I think is incorrect). In any case, those are the specs, which one can argue don't have much to do with one's ultimate results.

[kurt_kummerer]

Michael,

 

I got the LS50 2 days ago.

 

Although I've only had time to do 20 or so scans - so far I'm very impressed with speed and quality.

 

I've done some scans of Kodachrome slides which have come out very well without any tweaking.

 

I took a long time to make up my mind on which scanner to buy.

 

See this thread for some useful info:

http://www.photo.net/photo/2024736

 

Note that LS50 = 14bit analogue to digital converter whereas the

LS 5000 is 16bit.

 

The LS5000 allows multi-pass scanning, this is only possible with the LS50 if using Vuescan software.

 

The other differences are faster scanning with the LS5000 and more availability of adapters for batch scanning (I think this is right but please check it)

 

Regards

[mike l]

The only difference I can see from the summary spec sheets on the Nikon website is that the 5000 has a density range of 4.8 compared with the LS50 which has 4.2.

[greenisgold]

> Kurt Kummerer , jan 09, 2004; 10:53 a.m.

>

> I've done some scans of Kodachrome slides

> which have come out very well without any

> tweaking.

 

Kurt,

 

Did you have Digital Ice (the dust removal part) turned on? I've seen that the new version is supposed to support Kodachrome, but I haven't been clear whether or not this capability is included with all the new Coolscans, or just with the uber-expensive 9000.

 

Thanks!

 

Nick

[kurt_kummerer]

The thread link I put in above should have been this:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006jcs.

 

Thomas - no I have not tried the ICE with KC yet.

The scans I have done so far did not seem to neeed it - no spotting required at all - maybe just luck!

But I believe that the same version is supplied with all the models in the new range - ICE4.

[john_james]

was wondering if anyone has tried printing up to 13 X 19 from the Coolscan V? I'm told the Minolta 5400 achieves super sharp prints at that size with minor concerns over shadow detail. Thanks!

[simon_morris]

As a first time coolscanner I think I got unlucky in that all of my slides are Kodachrome, so I reckon I've learned the hard way.

 

Due to this, I've had a pretty frustrating time with my LS50 so far (although it's SO much faster than the LS40), I've had very mixed results with my slides. I scanned a batch of slides with ICE4 on, and it undoubtedly improved the scans (much less dust, better colour, less grain) however I found one (which I'm guessing is a "problem slide") that simply won't give me consistent results (noisy, poor exposure etc.). The most annoying problem I'm having (using NikonScan4) is that the preview scan occasionally doesn't match the output scan (significantly different), but I haven't got to the bottom of that yet..

 

Having spoken to Nikon Tech USA, their advice was that Kodachrome is just not compatible with ICE4 and I should turn it all off. Not ideal, so I will do some more scans using various options and post my findings.

[don_baccus]

Well, they do make the incompatibility of ICE4 and Kodachrome issue known up front. It's not just Nikon, it's any scanner that uses Applied Science Fiction's ICE technology.