From: Psygnosis - Silent Running on
"Kinon O'Cann" <somewhere(a)over.the.rainbow> wrote in message
news:3YOOi.384$C8.352(a)bos-service2b.ext.ray.com...
>
> "Tony" <none(a)none.com> wrote in message
> news:9pWdneJ9D6vJLJbanZ2dnUVZ_qWtnZ2d(a)comcast.com...
>> For a very good (hopefully excellent) film scanner and flatbed? I've read
>> the UK online and Shutterbug reviews, and it seems like once you use a
>> little careful USM and get the film the right distance from the sensor
>> that the V700 / V750 is almost as good as a Nikon L8000. If that's true
>> it may be quite good enough for most users.
>>
>> But I've also been looking at the other contenders: the Microtek i900 and
>> (not yet available?) M1, the HP 8300, and the Canon 9900F. I think the
>> Epson has a higher optical resolution that most (if not all) of these,
>> but I was wondering if anyone had any experience with a couple or a few
>> of these to tell if the Epsons are the hands down winners.
>>
>
> No flatbed I've ever used can touch a Coolscan 8000. I use an Epson V750,
> and while it is good, it's only about 60% of the Coolscan, at best.
>

Apparently you don't know how to use it then.

Psygnosis

From: Psygnosis - Silent Running on
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM(a)neo.rr.com> wrote in message
news:470bdde0$0$32517$4c368faf(a)roadrunner.com...
> My experience with flatbeds for 35mm has not been good. I suspect that
> even an old LS-2000 or LS-30 does a better job for 35mm negatives. Optical
> resolution is definitely not the issue. An LS-30/2000 is only 2,700 dpi,
> but that translates into 10 megapixels and, in TIFF format from the
> LS-2000, a 50 megabyte file. That's as much resolution or file size as I
> would want, even if more were available.
>
>
> Tony wrote:
>> For a very good (hopefully excellent) film scanner and flatbed? I've read
>> the UK online and Shutterbug reviews, and it seems like once you use a
>> little careful USM and get the film the right distance from the sensor
>> that the V700 / V750 is almost as good as a Nikon L8000. If that's true
>> it may be quite good enough for most users.
>>
>> But I've also been looking at the other contenders: the Microtek i900 and
>> (not yet available?) M1, the HP 8300, and the Canon 9900F. I think the
>> Epson has a higher optical resolution that most (if not all) of these,
>> but I was wondering if anyone had any experience with a couple or a few
>> of these to tell if the Epsons are the hands down winners.

Ah another brain that has never used the scanner.

Psygnosis

From: Tony on

"Kinon O'Cann" <somewhere(a)over.the.rainbow> wrote in message
news:3YOOi.384$C8.352(a)bos-service2b.ext.ray.com...
>
> "Tony" <none(a)none.com> wrote in message
> news:9pWdneJ9D6vJLJbanZ2dnUVZ_qWtnZ2d(a)comcast.com...
>> For a very good (hopefully excellent) film scanner and flatbed? I've read
>> the UK online and Shutterbug reviews, and it seems like once you use a
>> little careful USM and get the film the right distance from the sensor
>> that the V700 / V750 is almost as good as a Nikon L8000. If that's true
>> it may be quite good enough for most users.
>>
>> But I've also been looking at the other contenders: the Microtek i900 and
>> (not yet available?) M1, the HP 8300, and the Canon 9900F. I think the
>> Epson has a higher optical resolution that most (if not all) of these,
>> but I was wondering if anyone had any experience with a couple or a few
>> of these to tell if the Epsons are the hands down winners.
>>
>
> No flatbed I've ever used can touch a Coolscan 8000. I use an Epson V750,
> and while it is good, it's only about 60% of the Coolscan, at best.
>

You may not have seen this, but take a look here

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20V750/page_5.htm

at the V750 crop after USM. Also read the text.


From: Kinon O'Cann on

"Psygnosis - Silent Running" <Psygnosis(a)SilentRunning.com> wrote in message
news:470bf5b8$0$84926$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
> "Kinon O'Cann" <somewhere(a)over.the.rainbow> wrote in message
> news:3YOOi.384$C8.352(a)bos-service2b.ext.ray.com...
>>
>> "Tony" <none(a)none.com> wrote in message
>> news:9pWdneJ9D6vJLJbanZ2dnUVZ_qWtnZ2d(a)comcast.com...
>>> For a very good (hopefully excellent) film scanner and flatbed? I've
>>> read the UK online and Shutterbug reviews, and it seems like once you
>>> use a little careful USM and get the film the right distance from the
>>> sensor that the V700 / V750 is almost as good as a Nikon L8000. If
>>> that's true it may be quite good enough for most users.
>>>
>>> But I've also been looking at the other contenders: the Microtek i900
>>> and (not yet available?) M1, the HP 8300, and the Canon 9900F. I think
>>> the Epson has a higher optical resolution that most (if not all) of
>>> these, but I was wondering if anyone had any experience with a couple or
>>> a few of these to tell if the Epsons are the hands down winners.
>>>
>>
>> No flatbed I've ever used can touch a Coolscan 8000. I use an Epson V750,
>> and while it is good, it's only about 60% of the Coolscan, at best.
>>
>
> Apparently you don't know how to use it then.

Gee. Maybe you could come by and show me?

God, what a stupid comment.


From: Toni Nikkanen on
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" <username(a)qwest.net> writes:

> I plan on getting a V750 at some point, but some reviewers say
> it is not much different than an Epson 4990. The largest difference
> I see in the better flatbeds versus dedicated film scanners is the
> glass adds reflections and reduces contrast.

I'd add two other points:
- Flatbeds don't have an autofocus mechanism (not that I know of; height-
adjustable film holders do exist, though)
- Flatbeds don't seem to read RGB and IR channels in the same pass; this
contributes to the factor that Digital ICE doesn't work as well as in
a dedicated film scanner


Also, flatbeds have 2 more glass surfaces to keep clean. Of course,
using the glass carrier of the Nikon or Minolta Multipro means you
have four extra glass surfaces to keep clean!
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Rayovac PS3 charger
Next: Direct Compact Flash to Hard Drive