Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED and the Nikon Coolscan V ED

[randy_partridge]

I've inherited some rather nice Leica R camera bodies and lenses ... I'm

really enjoying using them, but am somewhat frustrated by the cost and

difficulty of getting film and slide captures converted properly into digital

form.

 

I'm not interested in selling all of this gear and starting over with a new

digital system ... I'm also not all that interested in buying another brand's

digital body and using my R lenses on that with an adapter. I don't want to

invest in a DMR, since neither of my R bodies are an R8 or R9. I'll probably

just keep what I have until Leica decides to release a true digital R.

Assuming that happens and it's reasonably affordable, I then would feel I

owned a very flexible setup, affording me the option to shoot film or go

digital whenever the situation dictates.

 

However in the interim, I'm thinking I'd like to have the ability to scan my

film and slides myself. Does anybody here have any recent experience with both

the Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED and the Nikon Coolscan V ED ... is the extra $500

(or so) for the 5000 ED model worth the extra expense? Would there be any

reason whatsoever to even consider the Nikon Coolscan 9000 ED, at about twice

the price of the 5000 ED?

 

I've searched the forum for prior threads on this subject and haven't found

anything recent that offers much useful information. Any feedback at all on

this topic would be quite useful ... thanks for your advice and insight.

[ronald_moravec1]

Randy, we are in the same boat.

 

I bought a Nikon D200 and use it next to the Leicas. It is pretty darn good, but not Leica. 99 of 100 will not see the difference.

 

If you are scaning slides, get the 5000ED as it has more dynamic range. Color neg will be fine in either. No advantage to one that takes 120 negs unless you buy the glass carrier and mask it down if that is even possible.

 

Film flatness is the problem. Put a book over a sheet of negs for a few days. After negs are a few months old , they seem to flatten.

This is the same a enlarging or slide projection. The neg must be flat.

 

If you know you way around a color darkroom, scaning is not hard.

There is a learning curve if not.

[ilkka_nissila]

I have the LS-5000 and LS-9000. LS-5000 is the better scanner for 35mm film, it is easier to get sharp scans with good corner-to-corner sharpness, it's also faster than the MF scanner. If you also shoot medium format film then the LS-9000 would be the better choice, but on big blow-ups (13x19) from 35mm film the LS-5000 does show a significant advantage in image quality. You can also get a roll film feeder and a slide feeder for the LS-5000 although at a substantial additional cost. These could reduce your labors in scanning.

 

If you shoot a lot of Kodachrome there may be an advantage to using the 9000 instead of the 5000. But generally you're better off scanning 35mm film with the 5000.

[jtk]

Film flatness is no problem unless your film is wildly curved, but even then the standard carrier does well. Neither 50 nor 5000 have the focus issues of earlier Nikons (eg 8000), 9000, OR Minoltas.

 

14bit Vs 16bit is nothing...however, the 5000 does allow multipass scanning....irrelevant to B&W, C41, or most E6 though some claims it helps deep shadows of their Velvia (specifically..ie not other E6) and Kodachrome.

 

5000's Ice implimentation reportedly works reliably with Kodachrome, whereas 50's works well with some vintages of Kodachrome and not others.

 

If you're dealing with lots of Kodachrome or Velvia, 5000 seems the answer.

 

IMO the main advantage to 5000 over 50 is the optional long roll transport...with 50 you're restricted to 6 frames at a time. This can be a very important if you're shooting C41 or E6.

[Stock-Photos]

Buy the 5000! It's faster and will accept the SF-210 slide feeder.

If you have lots of film to scan,that extra 500 won't mean nothin. Your time is worth it! Sell the 5000 when you DO switch to digital!

[robert lee]

"... 5000 ED model worth the extra expense?"

 

It depends on how much you shoot and want to digitize. I think the V accepts neither the bulk slide nor uncut film feeder.

[ilkka_nissila]

ICE does work on Kodachrome on the 5000 but the image is blurred unacceptably. On E6 film this problem doesn't happen.

 

Depth of field starts to give problems when making 13x and higher enlargements. At least on the 9000. Glass mounting is needed.

[Ed_Ingold]

I've never had a problem with DOF and strip film, whether negative or reversal. The strip and roll feeder holds the film very flat. Mounted slides, on the other hand, can be problematic since the film is cupped in two directions. If you plan to scan reversal film, get it processed uncut and unmounted. Does anyone even use a slide projector any more?

[ilkka_nissila]

Correct, film strips are easier to get good results from but I find them impractical as I want to select the good shots and toss the rest of the frames in a bin. For slides this is what I do. I don't want to be reminded of my bad shots every time I look in a folder! :-)

 

Well slide projection can give an emotional experience which prints don't. And for far less time and money. Currently I don't have a slide projector but I am planning on getting one.

[robert_k1]

Archive search at this site is broken, and I'm being kind. A better approach is to Google and target photo.net only.

 

Hate to sound like a broken record, but I have posted the following several times:

 

=======

 

Before making a decision, check the following links. Some Nikon users reported flares in their scans, but no Minolta users had reported this problem. I own many Nikon equipment, and would have gotten a Nikon scanner if not for the flares.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IGyN

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=001A4q

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004EWS

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00A2Sh

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CTcF

 

http://www.vad1.com/photo/dirty-scanner/

 

http://www.pearsonimaging.com/ls5000cleaning.html

 

This member apparently was aware of the flares:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00H558

 

Here's what he ended up with after buying a Nikon:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00HCnM

[jtk]

It's not surprising that optical devices flare when they're faulty or their lenses are dirty, or that someone claims bad results from what he claims online to be good films, or that an operator may be incompetent.

 

Minolta went out of business just in the nick of time, scanner-wise. Amazon denounced them. Minolta's last 35mm scanner was abject junk mechanically, though it did rival Nikon 50 when it actually functioned (my own tests), though it's Ice was inferior and its focus was FAR inferior. The earlier respectably-built Minolta took literally ten times longer to scan a slide and suffered serious focus problems.

[ilkka_nissila]

Well from a point of view of competition, it is not a good thing that Minolta scanners aren't made any more. Nikon could use the competition. For example it would be wonderful to see a mounting method which can take single frames and "pulls" the edges so that it stays flat. Using glass introduces additional surfaces which may affect quality. 35mm film strips work out great but like I said I prefer the handling characteristics of mounted slides.

 

For slide scanning one could always use additional dynamic range (PMT like).

 

On occasion I can see "double images" of high contrast subjects (leaves against a black background) in Nikon scans. And this was when my 5000 was brand new so it's unlikely to be just dirty optics.

 

Anyway I am happy with my current Nikons but would like to see additional competition.

[ilkka_nissila]

Just for reference here is an example of what the difference in sharpness between LS-5000 and LS-9000 looks like at 4000 ppi. Two crops from the edge of the frame (center is similar). Gepe 6012 (plain glass) + Gepe 7012 were used as a sandwich to get flatness of film with minimal reflections.

 

The film was Velvia 100F shot using a 105mm Nikkor DC at around f/8.5. No guarantee of correct focus at shooting stage ...

 

I tried to be careful about scanning but there might be counfounds there too.<div></div>

[ilkka_nissila]

Here is the 9000 scan.

[ilkka_nissila]

Sorry here is it online.<div></div>

[ilkka_nissila]

I think actually the difference may be compensated by adjusted slightly the curve ... It's very hard to see a difference between these scanners when glass mounting is used but generally I think it favors the smaller unit.

[randy_partridge]

Thanks everybody for all of this useful information. It's been very helpful.