Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by jimkramer, Oct 20, 2004.

  1. jimkramer

    jimkramer Guest

    Anybody using the Nikon Super Coolscan 5000 ED with the batch slide tray?
    Any feedback on slide scanning with this would be appreciated.

    Jim Kramer
    jimkramer, Oct 20, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. jimkramer

    Alan Browne Guest

    Not sure who here will answer; you might get more replies in

    Alan Browne, Oct 20, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. jimkramer

    jimkramer Guest

    Thanks Alan, but at least here I know who the crackpots are and who's
    opinion is worth listening to.

    Jim Kramer

    And for whoever keeps looking for the spider pictures
    jimkramer, Oct 20, 2004
  4. jimkramer

    Alan Browne Guest

    I won't ask which category I'm in, but I can attest to the comp.periphs.scanners
    crowd as being generally worth your time and effort.

    Alan Browne, Oct 20, 2004
  5. jimkramer

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    Do you mean the FH-3 or the SF-210?

    Generally speaking, if your principal goal is to obtain good slide scans,
    you should not have your slides mounted, and should use FH-3.

    If your principal goal is to quickly scan a whole buncha slides at once,
    repeatedly, you'll want to shell out for the SF-210. $450.

    If you have APS film, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    Bill Tuthill, Oct 21, 2004
  6. jimkramer

    jimkramer Guest

    Specifically the SF-210, I've agreed to do scanning of my Father in-law's
    and Grandfather in-law's old slides (already mounted) if they will buy the
    scanner. My gut feeling is they will be thrilled with 1000x1500 pixel
    images. Grandpa won't really know what to do with anything over 600x800, but
    I am sure he will want to print some so...

    I on the other hand want a higher end scanner that will let me make some
    really large prints. I got to play with an older Minolta scanner; and
    realistically, 15 minutes a slide isn't going to work for me. They will
    both be dead and buried before I get even part-way into their collections.

    APS Film? Oh, you mean the Advanced Phailure System?

    Jim Kramer
    jimkramer, Oct 21, 2004
  7. jimkramer

    Alan Browne Guest

    A Minolta 5400 will scan a slide in less than a minute at 5400 dpi, faster at
    lower res. Employing ICE will drive that up to 4 to 5 minutes/slide on a
    firewire equipped Celeron 2.4 Ghz with 512 Mbyte of memory. Alas, there is no
    bulk feeder for any of the Minoltas.

    Again Jim, I believe you have a wider audience with a wider set of inputs on
    comp.periphs.scanners (not to lessen Bill's contribution of course).

    Alan Browne, Oct 22, 2004
  8. jimkramer

    jimkramer Guest

    Yes, but the "wider audience" has jumped all over my post there with current
    underwhelming response of.... nothing as of 4:38 AM EST.
    jimkramer, Oct 22, 2004
  9. jimkramer

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    Yes, good plan. I don't think the Coolscan 5000 can do 600x800 resolution,
    only even divisors of 3900x5850 or whatever the actual crop turns out to be.

    This scanner is the obvious choice for you, I think. The Minolta 5400 is
    reputed to be very slow, and lacks auto slide feeder option. Practically,
    you are limited by storage space on your computer, but with SF-210 you can
    do something else while the slides are scanning.
    Bill Tuthill, Oct 22, 2004
  10. jimkramer

    Alan Browne Guest

    Better to have tried and lost than to not have tried at all. (to paraphrase).
    Alan Browne, Oct 22, 2004
  11. jimkramer

    Alan Browne Guest

    Sigh, I'm getting tired fo repeating this: the 5400 is not slow. Yes it is
    slower than the Nikons, no it does not take 15 minutes to scan a slide with ICE
    if you have reasonable processor in the PC and firewire or USB 2.0 (USB *is*
    slow for ICE). Without ICE selected it takes about 40 seconds to scan a slide
    at full res.

    Alan Browne, Oct 22, 2004
  12. jimkramer

    jimkramer Guest

    But it won't do a batch job, clean the slide or even chew-out the
    processor(film processor that is) for getting the slide dusty to start with.
    I'm looking for something that will be easy to automate for batch jobs and
    still give me the fine details when I want to print big. Please don't
    suggest MF.

    So while the 5400 may not be "slow," it will be slow (maybe you would prefer
    "time consuming") for me to use it for a batch job.

    Jim Kramer
    jimkramer, Oct 22, 2004
  13. jimkramer

    Alan Chan Guest

    Seems to me that with ICE on, 5400 will take 4mins+ at full resolution,
    while 5000ED will take 2mins-. This is quite significant when scanning lots
    of individual frames.
    Alan Chan, Oct 23, 2004
  14. jimkramer

    Mr Jessop Guest

    Providing the coolscan 5000ed doesn't cost 50% more of course 50% speed
    increase is significant. How much more expensive is the 5000 anyway?
    Mr Jessop, Oct 23, 2004
  15. jimkramer

    Magnus W Guest

    Pretty darned exactly 100% more expensive ;-)
    Magnus W, Oct 23, 2004
  16. jimkramer

    Phil Hobgen Guest

    A recent review (in the UK) of the LS50ED, the Elite 5400 and others gave
    the with ICE timings :
    LS50ED 1 min 30 sec
    Elite 5400 4 mins 50 sec
    (Presumably the 5000ED will be faster than that because Nikon give without
    ICE figures of 38sec and 20sec, so maybe about 1 min 10 sec on the LS5000ED)

    These timings are both on USB 2 to a 2.8GHz P4 with 512MB running XP.

    This seems to show that the LS5000ED is at least 4 times as fast for less
    than twice the cost. So it seems like excellent value on that basis.
    Phil Hobgen, Oct 23, 2004
  17. jimkramer

    Alan Browne Guest

    If you wouldn't top post, then the message you're replying to would appear as
    well. (your signature line causes everything below it to be lost in replies).

    My prev. reply was in responses to some people implying that the 5400 takes 15
    minutes to compete a scan ... which is false. As to it taking 4 minutes, that
    is true when ICE is used, but slides back from the processor, with some care for
    dust don't need ICE at all and it tlaes less than a minute. ICE is a tool to be
    used when needed, not by default.

    Alan Browne, Oct 23, 2004
  18. jimkramer

    Alan Browne Guest

    And for that you get 55% the number of pixels... so I guess it's closer to 4X
    the price per pixel for the Nikon?

    model res 36mm 24mm full res pix compare
    5400 5400 7654 5102 39051150 1.82
    5000 4000 5669 3780 21427243 0.54

    Alan Browne, Oct 23, 2004
  19. jimkramer

    Alan Browne Guest

    If one thinks that measuring the value of processing time is appropriate, to get
    slightly more that 1/2 the number of pixels, then I suppose so. But scanning at
    4000 or 5400 dpi is not about how fast it gets done but about how well it gets done.

    res 36mm 24mm pixels pixels
    dpi ratio
    5400 7654 5102 39,051,150 1.82
    4000 5669 3780 21,427,243 0.55

    When ICE is not used, the 5400 does a slide in under a minute (~45 secs) which
    is the way the scanner should be used. ICE is a tool when there are scratches
    and stuborn dust/dirt/smudges. I use ICE on about 1 slide in 10 and on about 1
    negative in 5.

    Alan Browne, Oct 23, 2004

  20. Actually, he's outright saying that my Minolta Scan Dual (One, yes
    One) does, start to finish, edits and tweaks included.

    And since he also mentioned scanning slides for someone else, at
    least in the version I'm reading, it's probably 30 years too damn late to
    be talking about taking care of the slides and how unnecessary ICE is.

    - Al.
    Al Denelsbeck, Oct 23, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.