Nikon V versus the 5000 film scanner?

[johnastovall]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm starting back doing film in my IIIG (may even start doing my developing and get an M4) and I see I need a scanner.

 

Those who have used the two Nikon's what are your feeling about them?

 

Also Nikon's software vs Vuescan vs Silverfast?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[LeonardT]

I'm starting back doing film in my IIIG (may even start doing my developing and get an M4) and I see I need a scanner.

 

Those who have used the two Nikon's what are your feeling about them?

 

Also Nikon's software vs Vuescan vs Silverfast?

 

John,

 

I have the CS V and the CS 9000 (I need to scan 120). I don't know what the difference between the V and the 5000 are since the dynamic range, scan time and film holders are the same. But I've done very close comparisons of the V vs the 9000 as far as scan quality goes. If you are extremely critical the 9000 is ever so slightly sharper. If I didn't shoot 120 I'd be very happy with the CS V.

 

I only use the Nikon software on my Mac G5. I think it's great. I have tried Vuescan and don't care for it.

 

Len

[john_newell]

The only real difference between the V and the 5000 is the ability to use the roll film and slide magazine adapters, but they are fairly expensive unless you really plan to use them.

[mub]

the 5000er is faster.

[leicapages]

Len, the fact that you scan both 35mm and 120 roll film is quite interesting for me since I have recently added MF equipment to my photographic "arsenal". On top of that I am also using the panorama format with the Hasselblad Xpan.

 

For the moment I am still using (when time...) the Nikon Super-Coolscan LS-2000 and find it quite ok though of course not the latest technology. The problem is that it has SCSI interface, which works very well on my ThinkPad under Windows XP running Nikon Scan, but does not work with Nikon Scan on my PowerBook under MacOS 10.5. As you, I am not particularly fond of Vuescan.

 

So I was thinking of buying another scanner, either 35mm only (current Super-Coolscan 5000 or V) or a combined 35mm/MF scanner (Super-Coolscan 9000 since the Hasselblad Imacon slidescanners are -regrettably- out of reach for me as a non-professional user). How well does the 9000 work with 35mm? Somewhere I read that it is more cumbersome to use it with 35mm than with 120 roll film.

 

Apart from the hardware, the software is going to be an issue as well as I note on the Nikon support website that Nikon Scan would not be compatible with Vista (so one would have to stay with XP I guess, unless one uses Vuescan instead). Nikon Scan should work with MacOS 10.5 but it is not binary and as such not optimized for use on current Intel processors. Anybody knows if that works well?

 

Thanks

[stunsworth]

I thought the 5000 was couple of bits better in the dynamic range stakes?

[mub]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nikon Scan should work with MacOS 10.5 but it is not binary and as such not optimized for use on current Intel processors. Anybody knows if that works well?

 

Thanks

 

Nikon Scan 4 ( 4.0.0.3020) works fine with Leopard.

[Maciel]

Use Vuescan.

 

Comparing N-scan to Vuescan on a V you will be wondering if the images came from the same scanner. Vuescan is dramatically better.

I have no experience with Silverfast.

 

Not affiliated, blablabla...

[LeonardT]

Len, the fact that you scan both 35mm and 120 roll film is quite interesting for me since I have recently added MF equipment to my photographic "arsenal". On top of that I am also using the panorama format with the Hasselblad Xpan.

 

For the moment I am still using (when time...) the Nikon Super-Coolscan LS-2000 and find it quite ok though of course not the latest technology. The problem is that it has SCSI interface, which works very well on my ThinkPad under Windows XP running Nikon Scan, but does not work with Nikon Scan on my PowerBook under MacOS 10.5. As you, I am not particularly fond of Vuescan.

 

So I was thinking of buying another scanner, either 35mm only (current Super-Coolscan 5000 or V) or a combined 35mm/MF scanner (Super-Coolscan 9000 since the Hasselblad Imacon slidescanners are -regrettably- out of reach for me as a non-professional user). How well does the 9000 work with 35mm? Somewhere I read that it is more cumbersome to use it with 35mm than with 120 roll film.

 

Apart from the hardware, the software is going to be an issue as well as I note on the Nikon support website that Nikon Scan would not be compatible with Vista (so one would have to stay with XP I guess, unless one uses Vuescan instead). Nikon Scan should work with MacOS 10.5 but it is not binary and as such not optimized for use on current Intel processors. Anybody knows if that works well?

 

Thanks

 

The 9000 is extremely easy to use with 35mm film, much easier then any of the other Nikon scanners. It comes with a 12 negative holder which takes two strips of 6 negatives each. Just line up the negatives with the negative frame spacing in the holder then close it. Then push the holder into the scanner and the scanner does the rest including auto registration, focus and exposure. I always batch scan 12 at a time and then just walk away.

 

On the other hand 2 1/4 is a little more tedious. I had to invest in Nikon's glass carrier which can hold three 2 1/4 negatives or any other format on 120 or 220 film. There is no auto registration on where the negatives are so you have to fiddle a little to get the scan started in exactly the right place. After you do that it's fine. Through software you tell the scanner whether the negative is 6X6, 6X7, 6X9 or whatever. The glass carrier is a must though for perfect focus of the whole negative. You can buy it through B&H but it's a little costly.

 

Len

[LeonardT]

I thought the 5000 was couple of bits better in the dynamic range stakes?

 

Hi Steve,

 

You're right. The density of the V is 4.2 versus 4.8 for the 5000. I thought it was different so I checked the specs on the B&H site which shows them the same. That was a mistake. Nikon shows the difference.

 

Len

[john_newell]

I thought the 5000 was couple of bits better in the dynamic range stakes?

 

14 vs 16 but in real life I can't see it, and haven't met anyone else who claims to be able to with a straight face.

[nyphoto01]

I recently got the 5000 and also went for Vuescan, since I wasn't very happy with Nikonscan. I'm still trying to arrive at consistent scans, I've spent many sleepless nights and I'm still not satisfied. But I'm sure that must be a very common problem when choosing the "shoot film and scan" approach.

[Kent10D]

I recently got the 5000 and also went for Vuescan, since I wasn't very happy with Nikonscan. I'm still trying to arrive at consistent scans, I've spent many sleepless nights and I'm still not satisfied. But I'm sure that must be a very common problem when choosing the "shoot film and scan" approach.

 

I've found that whenever I change film or developing procedures I need to modify the scan settings, but as long as those parameters remain constant I'm able to get very consistent results with the 5000 and Vuescan.

[Guest Bernd Banken]

The CS V allows just one scan, the bigger Nikons allow multiple scans with the original software. Vuescan allows multiple scans with the CS 5.

[ai1]

I have a 5000ED and am very pleased with it. I use Coolscan. I have tried the Vuescan demo and found, at least in demo form, it less capable than Coolscan. In the past I have used Silverfast AI 6.5 on a Kodak 35mm scanner and I am currenty (and recently) using Silverfast SE Plus on my Microtek Artixscan M1 for scanning 4"x5" negatives. Currently, my films of choice are Fuji 160S Pro for both 35mm and 4x5 and Ilford XP-2 for 35mm. However, I also use the Nikon scanner for older Kodachorme and Ektachrome slides (using IT-8 calibration in Photoshop).

 

I scan 35mm in 16 bit with a 2x scan with usually only a minor curves or sometime LCH adjsutment. I do most of my adjusting in Photoshop, which has the distinct advantage of allowing me to use adjsutment layers. I generally find the scans from the Nikon scanner require only modest adjustments: typically only a curves adjustment (including adjusting RGB curves for color, which is a very simple technique to get neutral tones using the color sampler eyedropper), and check but do not always need levels and sometimes selective color. The only problem I have with Coolscan is that it occasionally crashes and has to be reinstalled.

[hlockwood]

I'm starting back doing film in my IIIG (may even start doing my developing and get an M4) and I see I need a scanner.

 

Those who have used the two Nikon's what are your feeling about them?

 

Also Nikon's software vs Vuescan vs Silverfast?

 

I've had the 4000ED for several years now, and I'm quite happy with it (on a Mac.) Although I've tried Vuescan (repeatedly, after reading how great it is) the NikonScan interface is much easier to deal with. I've done a few comparisons, based on the claims of others, but the results have been inconclusive.

 

Harry

[leicamr]

I use a Nikon LS5000ED with a slide hopper (SF210). I have started to seriously use this equipment to scan my very large slide collection. I use Nikon Scan 4 and leave all settings to default, except I do use the dirt reduction setting set to minimum. Should I scan a really old slide that has suffered over the years from colour fading etc. I do use the grain and colour (GEM) settings. I save the files as TIFF. I would really like to save as NEF but the NEF files are not recognised in RAW converters which is a real shame. If anybody knows differently please advise me.

 

I have developed my photoshop skills over the past two years since using my DMR and M8 and I make all the necessary adjustments to the files.

 

Please check this link of a recent batch scanned of shots taken in NYC

 

http://www.flickr.com/gp/64867143@N00/5071d6

 

Regards

 

Mark

[gilo]

Has anybody tried the Noritsu LS600? How does it compare with the various Nikon 5000or4 Minolta etc?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[fotografr]

I would really like to save as NEF but the NEF files are not recognised in RAW converters which is a real shame. If anybody knows differently please advise me.

 

Mark

 

You should be able to convert the NEF files to DNG, which would then be recognised in RAW converters.

 

Adobe - Digital Negative (DNG)

[kcg]

I recently purchased the Nikon LS-5000ED and am extremely pleased with it. I use Nikon Scan 4.0.2. It is much faster than the old 3.4 software and, in my opinion does an excellant job of scanning in NEF. Although my main conversion software is Capture NX2, much better and faster then NX, I also open NEF with Photoshop CS3.