Nikon Coolscan V vs. Coolscan 5000 scan quality

[david_williams11]

Hi, I'm looking for a scanner and I am looking at the new Coolscan

series. There is a dramatic difference between the price of each and

I'm trying to decide which to choose. I have some criteria so,

unlike lots of posts I'll try to give some specifics.

 

1) I don't care about top speed and if the major difference in price

between the two is speed then I'll go with the Coolscan V.

 

2) I'm not into high volume but I do want to haul out the best

quality for the price. I've noticed in the specs that the 5000 has a

dual CCD and also that the Dmax is a bit higher than the V but I

guess what I'm asking is whether or not the price difference is

reflective of quality.

 

3) I like taking low light photos, sunsets, sunrises with a lot of

shadow areas so will I get dramatically better results with the

5000. I know that the Dmax and multisampling of the 5000 will make a

difference but is it marginal or large?

 

I know that evaluating these machines is somewhat subjective but if

anyone can give me some thoughts then that would be great.

 

In summary, if I cab get a dramatic improvement in quality then I'll

pay for 5000 vs the V and take the extra speed as well, however if

I'm paying for a dramatic improvement in speed and a marginal

improvement in quality I'll save my money and go with the V.

 

An input would be great!

 

Dave

[Ed_Ingold]

The Coolscan 5000 allows the scanning process to be automated, using roll and slide feeders. This reduces the total scanning time to 1/3 to 1/2 that of manual feeding, and reduces the time you actually have to spend in attendance by 90%. If your time's worth nothing, go with the V; the quality should be more than adequate.

[peter_rivard]

The Dmax issue is more complicated than scanner makers' literature says. 16 bit A/D

converters will handle up to 4.8 Dmax, 14 bit up to 4.2, but that doesn't mean the

image produced actually has a Dmax of 4.8 or 4.2. If your local interstate had a

speed limit of 275 mph, would that mean that your Honda Civic would go that fast?

What the scanners actually produce would be lower. I'd guess the 5000 would have a

slightly higher Dmax than the V, but any difference might be theoretical, because the

Dmax of a film image is quite a bit less than 4.2--either scanner would probably

succeed in getting ALMOST everything out of a piece of film--I don't think you'd

notice an improvement over the V unless you went up to a drum scanner. Again, 4.8

and 4.2 are the maximum allowed by the A/D converter, not what the imaging system

is actually capable of producing, and not what the the film is capable of containing.

 

Multiscan might improve the apparent Dmax even more--but that doesn't distinguish

the scanners either: the Coolscan V is capable of multiscan if you use the vuescan

software. But isn't the main advantage of multiscan supposed to be reduced noise in

the shadows rather than increased shadow detail?

 

As a user note, I've been running the V, and for me the scan enhancer, which adjusts

the highlight and shadows, seems to pull more out of the extremes than I'd thought

possible, far more than I've been able to see in highlights and shadows of

professionally made (darkroom) prints. If the 5000 can make a better scan, it

wouldn't be a dramatic improvement, perhaps only slightly noticeable in only the

most extreme shots. I think the 5000 is a good investment for someone making a

living with it, someone who needs the speed and convenience it and its accessories

offer.

 

Obviously, if anyone can manage to test both scanners on the same image, I'd love to

see it.

[john_shriver]

Responding to Peter about Dmax.

 

Scanner Dmax specs are just about meaningless garbage. They merely state the dynamic range of the analog-to-digital (A/D) converter reading the analog outputs of the CCD chip. No CCD scanner can really scan to a density range of 4.2 or 4.8. The CCD chips do NOT have a linear relationship between light in and voltage out at those low light levels. No way, period.

 

All that Dmax 4.2 means is that the A/D is 14 bit, and 4.8 means 16 bit. It's been reduced to marketing drivel. I don't know which vendor started it, but they have all been reduced to this level of inane meaningless specsmanship.

 

It is quite likely that the actual scannable density range of the Coolscan V and 5000 are very close to the same.

 

The reality is that Kodachrome slides, which have an enourmous density range, have more density range than my Coolscan IV can scan. You have to play with the analog gain (light intensity) and decide whether you want to clip the highlights or the shadows. The Coolscan IV has a nominal 3.6 Dmax rating -- which means it uses a 12 bit A/D convertor.

 

If you look at Kodak's Kodachrome datasheet (E-88), it looks like densities get up to about 3.7 or 3.8 (in the red only). Let's just say that the Coolscan IV is clearly not capable of a real 3.6 density range, or Kodachrome wouldn't be challenging it.

 

Not that the Coolscan IV can't scan Kodachrome. It's just if you shot a really contrasty scene (artificial light without enough shadow fill), you're going to have to compromise at the end of the dynamic range.

 

I suspect that despite the Dmax differences, that the Coolscan V and 5000 still will be challenged by contrasty Kodachrome. That's because their real Dmax is probably under 4.0. But, Kodachrome scanning is not a very important market anymore.

 

Moreover, I'm not knocking the Nikon scanners on Kodachrome. Because of the analog gain controls, they are good for scanning Kodachrome, because you can use them to center the density range of the particular slide on the density range of the CCD. This is just an issue of the fundamental limits of current CCD devices.

 

More relevantly, the Dmax rating differences between the V and 5000 will be irrelevant in scanning E-6, C-41, and B&W film. (E-6 probably has the highest density range, Kodak E100G goes to 3.4.) This is not a reason to choose between them. It's mostly a taunt on Nikon's part to make the insecure buyer choose the 5000.

 

The fundamental difference is that the 5000 is marketed to pros, accepts the pro accessories (slide feeder, roll film feeder), has more resolution, and has a LOT more markup. The V is the prosumer model, and has lower markup.

 

Resolution, speed, and accessories are the primary basis for choosing between the V and the 5000. Not Dmax. How much the resolution matters depends on how big you want to print.

[carl_pearson1]

IMO speed is the main reason to buy the 5000. Time is money.

[vgoklani]

"The fundamental difference is that the 5000 is marketed to pros, accepts the pro accessories (slide feeder, roll film feeder), has more resolution"

 

why does it have more resolution??

[steve_bingham]

Hmmmm. I bought the V for my wife. Should get it tomorrow. I'll run some tests. As for extreme density range, scan the slide twice; once for shadows and once for highlights. Then combine in Photoshop. For the digital camera version of this technique using raw file with double conversion, go to here: http://www.dustylens.com/extended_range.htm

 

The last part of the technique should be the same. Be SURE "Snap" is checked in "View". This will allow one image to snap in place over the other.

[david_williams11]

Thanks for all the informative posts.

[pavel_zelinsky]

Dear Coolscan V owners!

 

Does it allow scanning of an entire stip at once or I have to scan each picture one-by-one? If it allows scanning of an entire stip at once, does it automatically adjust to each photo density and so on?

 

Thank you,

 

Pavel

[john_shriver]

<p>Vishal asks "why does it [5000] have more resolution?" The 5000 and V are both 4000 dpi, they have the same resolution. They have a different D/A part, and they have "product differentiation via software". As I noted before, there was no reason that the V didn't take the bulk slide feeder and long roll adapter but "higher profits".<br>

Similarly, when I upgraded from a Coolscan IV to V recently (how could I resist for $400), I discovered that the V unlocks the "DEE" feature in Nikon Scan 4.0. That's not a hardware feature, it's all in Nikon Scan, but they only enable it if the scanner is a Coolscan V or higher. (Of course, in this case, it may not be just about profits, it may also be about royalties paid to Applied Science Fiction, the authors of DEE.<br>

As for "does it allow scanning of an entire strip at once", the answer with Nikon Scan is a definite no. With third party software such as Vuescan or SilverFast, that could be different.</p>