Nikon Coolscan 5000 vs Coolscan V vs ???

wintoid · 08-09-2007

I'm considering upgrading my scanner to a Coolscan 5000. I wondered whether anyone had any comments to offer re the various scanning options available. I'm a Vuescan user, currently using a Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II (not the 5400), which is a very small and nice firewire/usb scanner, but only 2820 dpi. I'm aware the 5000 is USB only, but am hoping the 4000dpi might help with grain aliasing, and that the 16 bit converters might give more depth to BW scans. I rarely use colour of any sort.

Tim Gray · 08-09-2007

I also picked up the V and love it. The main difference in my mind is the ability to take the bulk roll and slide attachments. My take on the roll attachment is it's really not needed for my work. I've only scanned most of a roll once and it took just a bit of extra time inserting the strips. Usually its just 2-3 frames per roll.

On the other hand, if you have a huge backlog of slides, the bulk slide attachment could come in handy...

wintoid · 08-09-2007

I see, so the quality is the same, but one is faster.... hmm... well I do hate all the hanging around waiting for scans... think think.... think think think...

JNewell · 08-09-2007

Speed is nice - the price delta is pretty significant, though.

szrenner · 08-09-2007

Hi,

I asked my self the same question a few weeks. I had the Minolta 5400 (v1) which is a good scanner but with problems with the field of depth in the corners even with framed negatives. And on top of this it terrible slow!

So asked my self buying the "Nikon 5000" or the "V ED" and decide finally for the 5000 as it pretty fast (double to V ED) and its 16bits. I've read some messages here that the 5000 is not the best one for B&W, but I have to say it a great scanner which gives you access to lots of accessories. And the color scanns are superb.

I think it's worth the money !

wintoid · 08-10-2007

Well I have a 5000 on my desk now. I'm glad I didn't get the V. My Minolta, being lower resolution 2820dpi, was quite fast, and the V would have seemed very slow in comparison. I've scanned a few old negs, and there's no question that the 5000 is better than the Minolta, but not by as much as you would think, and mainly with colour. I hate the way the 5000 loads film with no carrier, and will definitely miss the Minolta carrier. Will probably seek out the FH3 at some point. It's also a real shame that this nice looking scanner is spoiled by that horrible plastic carbuncle that hangs off the front.... eeurgh.

Anyway, I'm happy, and thanks to all who have helped.

wintoid · 08-10-2007

Oh, in case anyone is interested in comparative shots, these were both done with Vuescan with close to identical settings.

Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED

Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite II (not the 5400)

I'd imagine I'll be selling the Minolta at some point soon.