Amateur Photographer reviewed the K-M Scan Elite 5400II last week, and gave
it a very favourable verdict:
FOR:
Very high resolution
Excellent dynamic range
Much better handling than previous model
Good colour and exposure control
AGAINST:
Can't deal with panoramics
Film-strip holder could be better
In the text I found one passage particularly insightful:
"In our test of the original ... Dimage Scan Elite 5400 ... we found that
while the results the scanner produced were of excellent quality, getting
those results could sometimes be frustrating. In this newer Konica Minolta
has promised faster scanning times and more rapid previewing, indexing and
general handling. It is also said that Minolta has drawn on a good deal of
Konica's mini-lab experience to produce automated colour and exposure
analysis systems that bring high-end controls to the domesticated desktop."
Aside from my desktop hardly qualfying for the description "domesticated", I
think they liked it quite a bit.
If there is interest, I could be persuaded to scan and put it up on a
webpage for a short while.
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Andrew Dacey
Sent: 20 June 2005 15:26
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: K-M Dimage Scan Dual IV users here? or Scan Elite II
On 6/20/05, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> For modest bulk scanning, you might consider the Epson 4870 & 4990 and
> the Canon 9950F. Reviews of all of them with direct comparisons to the
> Nikon 4000 are at photo-i <http://www.photo-i.co.uk/>. The Canon is
> particularly attractive for bulk scanning, as it will hold 12 slides
> or
> 5 strips of six frames each of unmounted film, 30 frames. The Epsons
> hold 8 slides and 4 strips. They really do come awfully close to film
> scanners for any but the most demanding, huge displays and have the
> advantage of scanning MF and 4x5 as well.
Thanks Moose,
I've had some concerns about the quality of flatbed scans for 35mm but I
know they have gotten a lot better. I didn't realise the 9950F had such good
bulk options so I'll take a look at that one. I notice that Canon has
completely dropped film scanners so they've either decided that flatbeds
have reached a high enough quality to compete or they feel that film
scanners are too small a market. I suspect the latter but they probably say
the former.
>From previous comparisons I've seen, flatbeds usually can't offer the shadow
detail that you can get with a dedicated film scanner but I'll see how the
9950F reviews. I do have some MF stuff and would like to shoot more as well
as some 4x5 so having 1 scanner that can handle all of those would be a big
plus.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|