Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I have an opportunity to get one of these at a very good price. A friend has two of them that she bought to start a home scanning business that never really took off ... so they've had very little use! She and her husband have recently inherited a LOT of money from their family estate so I suspect not only will they never be used again but they may be extremely cheap ... especially if I buy the two of them.
I'm perfectly happy with my V700 for medium and LF where it does an excellent job IMO and recently bought Better Scanning's MF holders with the glass inserts. 135 is pretty average though and has actually discouraged me from shooting a lot of that format.
How good is the 5000 ED compared to the Epson? I've heard that it tends to emphasize grain ... is that a problem or just something that can be addressed in post processing?
I'm perfectly happy with my V700 for medium and LF where it does an excellent job IMO and recently bought Better Scanning's MF holders with the glass inserts. 135 is pretty average though and has actually discouraged me from shooting a lot of that format.
How good is the 5000 ED compared to the Epson? I've heard that it tends to emphasize grain ... is that a problem or just something that can be addressed in post processing?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I'll add that I was thinking about the new Plustek 120 but it seems a little hit and miss quality wise and is over two grand here in Oz. I would seriously worry about the support if I encountered some of the problems I've read about. Of course the Nikon is a discontinued product but at least these scanneras are low milage and should give me a trouble free run for some time hopefully!
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I have the Coolscan V, which is essentially the Super Coolscan 5000 mechanicals with USB and fewer feed accessory options. I also had an Epson V700 in the past, which I sold because while it was somewhat better than the Epson 2450 for scanning 35mm, it wasn't as good as the Minolta Scan Dual II or Nikon Coolscan IV, and wasn't enough better than the 2450 for medium format.
The Coolscan V/5000 improves on the IV/4000 models with more resolution as well as more depth of field (film curvature would more often become an issue with the IV model). Compared to the V700 (and any other flat bed scanner, for that matter, it is simply no contest on consistency and quality for 35mm film: the Coolscan V/5000 outperforms the V700 by a wide margin on resolution, dmax, tonal capture—just about everything.
The Coolscan V/5000 have an LED light source which is akin to a condensor enlarger. Great for pulling detail and contrast out of good exposures, a little difficult sometimes with overly contrasty scenes or film with lots of dirt and grain. Nothing terrible, nothing that you can't handle with proper settings and image processing after the fact. (By comparison, the Super Coolscan 9000ED has a more diffuse light source which is like a diffuser head in an enlarger, a little nicer for dirty film and contrasty scenes.)
If you can get one at a decent price, I'd say snap it up! Prices on the 5000ED have gone out of sight and I haven't seen any indication that the remaining film scanners on the market are in the same ballpark with regards to quality, consistency, and performance. I've have my V for a couple of years and bought the 9000ED this year ... I'm very glad I had the opportunity to acquire both at decent prices and will be using them for a long time to come.
G
mikechambers
Member
I just moved from a v500 to a CoolScan 4000, and it is light years better for 35mm scanning, both in quality and ease of use.
I had actually been considering getting out of film due to the hassle of scanning, but the CoolScan is making me reconsider that.
I had actually been considering getting out of film due to the hassle of scanning, but the CoolScan is making me reconsider that.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Thanks Godfrey ... that's a very comprehensive response to my questions. Sounds like they are well worth getting.
Timmyjoe
Veteran
Hi Keith,
I had a Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED scanner for a number of years. It was the best film scanner I had ever owned, until I got a Coolscan 9000 ED. If you are scanning color negs or slides, the 5000 ED will produce scans that rival the 9000 ED. If you are scanning B&W negs, the Coolscan 9000 ED is slightly better in that it is more of a diffusion light scanner, as opposed to a condenser light scanner (5000 ED). You can control the contrast in B&W negs somewhat better with the 9000 ED.
But the Coolscan 5000 ED is one heck of a great scanner, and having the possibility of doing batch scans with the one attachment, where you can do a whole roll of 35mm film, that is a fantastic advantage.
It's a good machine.
Best,
-Tim
I had a Nikon Coolscan 5000 ED scanner for a number of years. It was the best film scanner I had ever owned, until I got a Coolscan 9000 ED. If you are scanning color negs or slides, the 5000 ED will produce scans that rival the 9000 ED. If you are scanning B&W negs, the Coolscan 9000 ED is slightly better in that it is more of a diffusion light scanner, as opposed to a condenser light scanner (5000 ED). You can control the contrast in B&W negs somewhat better with the 9000 ED.
But the Coolscan 5000 ED is one heck of a great scanner, and having the possibility of doing batch scans with the one attachment, where you can do a whole roll of 35mm film, that is a fantastic advantage.
It's a good machine.
Best,
-Tim
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
This is the same scenario that currently confronts me ... I have a couple of thousand feet of 135 film in the freezer that isn't being used because of the tardy results of the Epson.
So what you're saying is that you can potentially buy both scanners for a good price, then flip one at the current market price, thus ending up with an excellent scanner basically for free? Don't walk, RUN!
FYI Nikon still has parts for and services the Coolscan V, 5000, and 9000, and should continue to do so for at least 4 or 5 more years.
FYI Nikon still has parts for and services the Coolscan V, 5000, and 9000, and should continue to do so for at least 4 or 5 more years.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
That thought has crossed my mind ... along with the thought of keeping both of them!
I sent her an email to try and get her to indicate a price. She's a retirey who's time now appears to be taken up with zooming around the globe to exotic locations. Tough life!
gilpen123
Gil
I have the 5000ED and it's really miles ahead in the 135 film scanning as against the flatbeds. I still have the V500 which I now use to scan prints and it does a good job for that. My Nikon scan software can no longer be used with my newer mac and I tried vuescan but not up to it yet.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I've been using VueScan to drive all the scanners I've owned since 2000. It does a superb job, and is maintained regularly. It's also cheap and runs on Linux, Windows and OS X, all versions.
Nice solution to getting some film rebate into the scan. Now that I have the Coolscan 9000, when I want that I can use the ANR glass carrier ... It's kind of the expensive solution to get the job done, but I love being able to scan my 6x6 and Minox negs with it (I picked up a wonderful adapter custom made for Minox negative strips that goes right into the 9000ED standard 120 carrier).
Film scanners make continuing to work with film doable for me. Without them, I haven't got the patience or the time anymore.
G
maddoc
... likes film again.
I have a Coolscan 4000ED and an Epson V700 and for 35mm BW I prefer the V700 if the film is flat and I have enough time. For a quick scan-job and posting some small-size images to the web then the 4000ED does the job. However, I used to have an V that was way better than the 4000ED (resolution & dynamic range) but could not scan a complete 135-36 strip as can the 4000ED do with SA-30 adapter or modified SA-21.
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
Get the scanners, and get the roll film feeder (some people modify the standard feeder). The 5000 really is great for batch scanning.
If you are doing your own developing, you can walk it from wherever you dry the film, right into the scanner with minimal film handling. Not cutting and sleeving the film first cuts out a lot of opportunities for dust and scratches. Once you have figured out the workflow, you can set it up, walk away and spend the rest of the time on rff.
sanmich
Veteran
The 5000 has no competitor in some ways.
the motorized film feeding and the ability to scan a full roll is such a blessing when you shoot a lot...
The quality is there too.
My only gripes with this scanner:
it tends to give dark banding at the edge of the frame.
It is incredibly unforgiving with scratches. The good part is that it educated me to be more careful. I also bought a scanhancer that helps, but makes scanning more tricky. For some reason, some frames didn't show details in the deep shadows when using the scanhancer with vuescan, but with Nikon soft it was ok (go figure...)
All in all, my scan needs to do two very different things:
1- quick low res of large batches (I scan all my films et low res for cataloging)
2 - high quality scan of one specific frame
the 5000 is ok with both tasks. if it wasn't it, I may have chosen to have two scanners. One for each.
my advice: buy it!, we may have a thread "35mm, long may it live!" soon enough
the motorized film feeding and the ability to scan a full roll is such a blessing when you shoot a lot...
The quality is there too.
My only gripes with this scanner:
it tends to give dark banding at the edge of the frame.
It is incredibly unforgiving with scratches. The good part is that it educated me to be more careful. I also bought a scanhancer that helps, but makes scanning more tricky. For some reason, some frames didn't show details in the deep shadows when using the scanhancer with vuescan, but with Nikon soft it was ok (go figure...)
All in all, my scan needs to do two very different things:
1- quick low res of large batches (I scan all my films et low res for cataloging)
2 - high quality scan of one specific frame
the 5000 is ok with both tasks. if it wasn't it, I may have chosen to have two scanners. One for each.
my advice: buy it!, we may have a thread "35mm, long may it live!" soon enough
Glenn2
Well-known
Another happy CS-5000 user here. I now scan my negs and slides and print them on an Epson 3880 rather than in the wet darkroom. It's much easier to tweak contrast and do adjustments with software and you only have to spot dust once.
A local camera shop is asking $2199 for a used CS-5000, yikes! I only paid a bit over $1300 new several years ago.
A local camera shop is asking $2199 for a used CS-5000, yikes! I only paid a bit over $1300 new several years ago.
btgc
Veteran
This or dedicate one of them for a local scanning service (depends on your conditions, though). I have impression you don't shoot much 35mm this days anymore, but if you can run small business to cover some of your own photographical...needs? Depending on volume and prices, this can cover [part of] your own film expenses or maybe even partially fund upcoming DPZoom.
Well, if you can snatch two scanners at a time probably you don't need a fundraising side biz, but....just an idea.
redisburning
Well-known
I doubt anyone is going to pay you your opportunity cost to scan.
I think these make a lot more sense as a main unit and backup, or like Jon said a free scanner that happens to be really, really good.
I think these make a lot more sense as a main unit and backup, or like Jon said a free scanner that happens to be really, really good.
Mystyler
Established
I'd be happy to take the other one off her hands if you don't and the price is sensible......!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I just bumped into her husband at the local shops and had a coffee with him ... like most husbands he doesn't have a clue what she's up to!
I did get their phone number so I can ring her tomorrow morning.
I did get their phone number so I can ring her tomorrow morning.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I shoot slower with MF too. Actually, I shoot with 35mm and digital pretty much the same way, most of the time, and like with MF sometimes too: slow and deliberate.
It doesn't change the fact that working darkroom printing, etc, is too much time for me now. Everything that goes to a print is processed, rendered, digitally. Other than Polaroid ...
G