I can't comment on 5000 vs. V, as I only have the 5000 (previously had
the 2000).  The V does look like a rather sweet price/performance
point.  I got the 5000 and the sf201 slide feeder, because I have a
lot of old slides to deal with.

But I can comment on the software.  I've used only the Nikon software
with it, and I'm adequately happy with it.  I take the approach of
attempting to get all the information out of the film, leaving the
rest of the work to be done in Photoshop later.  

I think there is plenty enought developed film in the world to keep
scanners going for a long time yet, don't worry.

JimKramer (jimG@jlkramer.net) wrote in news:1138138390.936012.144900
@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Be glad. :)

I just bought the Nikon V ED (LS-50); I don't have many slides to scan,
but a lot of negative film, which would make the 5000 too expensive for
me compared to advantages such as a firewire interface.

I considered the KM 5400 II - but not for long. For starters, all tests
I've seen state that the sharpness isn't any different from that with
the LS-50. On top of that, The Nikon has real ICE because it has an
infrared sensor, which the KM doesn't have; also the Nikon uses three
colored leds to do the color separation whereas the KM has only a single
(white) led - I have not seen any tests specific to that, but it just
makes more sense to me.

And a big issue: While the KM has good optics and sharpness, it's built
like a toy, with plastic cogwheels*. The Nikon is a lot heavier and not
for nothing: all metal, it's built like a tank. Only possible
disadvantage: that makes it a bit noisy as well (which doesn't really
bother me).

I don't know about the 5000, but the LS-50 comes with a film adapter and
a slide adapter, but NOT with a film holder. But if you have any single-
negative strips (or single unmounted slides), or film strips with
damaged sprocket holes, or strips that aren't flat enough, you *will*
need one: the FH-3 should have been included IMO.

I've had teh LS-50 only a short while, so I have not much experience
with it yet, but first trials make me very happy!

*) I heard that many machines were returned - this may be one of the
causes: plastic cogwheels don't sound too reliable to me. Maybe good
enough for an occasional scan, not if you have loads to do. This may be
the reason it's no longer in stock - apart from KM pulling out of the
photography business, which may or may not include scanners...

You can breathe a sigh of relief.  

The DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 II was optically good, but mechanically, it
was a pile of junk.  The warranty returns rate was very high, and the
scanner could not cope with hard work.       

I bought one, returned it for a replacement within a week, and then
found the replacement failed within a month.  The camera store
couldn't offer a new replacement but offered me a "refurbished" model
with a substantial rebate.  I declined, and chose the Nikon Coolscan
LS5000ED instead.  

I have no regrets - it is a robust and reliable scanner and the detail
it produces is every bit as good as the DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 II,
despite the latter's claimed higher resolution.  

I strongly recommend the Nikon slide feeder SF-210 if you scan a lot
of mounted slides.

I had hoped to get a KM DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 II, this month, but B&H
lists them as out of stock and the sales rep said his gut feeling was
that they weren't going to see any more, ever.

So... that leaves me with, as I see it, two viable options, both from
Nikon (unless they decide to call it quits too) the Coolscan V ED or
the Super Coolscan 5000 ED.  So the question becomes other than the
price difference which is significant, almost ½, the scanning speed,
again almost half and 42bit vs. 48bit, what's the real difference?

Anyone used one or the other or both? Thoughts, feeling, alternatives,
and comments would be appreciated.  Is the included software useable or
should I look for third party stuff now?

Thanks,
Jim
--------------------
I use a 5000 ED daily in my business. Nothing wrong with the scanner, It's a
honey but the Nikon software is total rubbish. It crashes with no
predictability of when or what causes it. Vuescan needs profiles and much
fiddling to get it working properly and Silverfast is a variation of the
Chinese water torture trick.

Last month I bought a new Epson flat bed to replace my 4870 which did only
mildly acceptable scans of 35mm film although on anything larger is was
good. I bought the latest and greatest Professional scanner from Epson
(again - the 3rd Epson in a row), a Perfection 4490.

This scanner does all sizes of film at least as well as the Nikons. IMHO,
better and has all the features I originally bought the Nikon for plus it
scans photographs too. It's interface is bullet-proof, easy to use and on
full auto absolutely magnificent. More than I can say about the Coolscan.

Annika1980 (Bret) has one of the Minolta scanners. He reported it had
warranty issues and he's not the only one. Even if you managed to find one,
getting it fixed when it craps out would be real problem.

Sorry to say that it depends on your needs.  The *real* difference
between 42 and 48 bits (2 bits per channel) is very hard to distinguish.
 Those extra bits all go to the darkest part of your slides / negs.

IMO they do not help at all for the "black" in slides;  they *might*
help for detail in the blacks on color negative (the whites in the
print) as that doesn't seem as dense as the unexposed dead blacks on slides.

I'm buying the 9000 ED shortly.  So I could sell you my 5400.  But it's
the older version (cold cathode flourescent).  The Nikon 5000 (not sure
about the V) uses LED's (as does the more recent Minolta 5400 Mk II)
which is more consistent wrt to color process.

B&H is not the last store on earth, so you could check around...

Check out news:comp.periphs.scanners and get their opinions as well.

Cheers,
Alan

Looked around found iut at a place called dbuys.com, so don't worry.