So, in summary, the Nikons are great - except for some uncorrectable
performance issues that degrade images? You didn't get around to
mentioning the shallow DOF issue many have reported with the Nikons.
Thanks guys, for reminding me how happy I am to have chosen the Canon
FS4000. :-)
Diffuse light source, no mirror, deep DOF.
Moose
C.H.Ling wrote:
> Yes, hazy is still there, 4000ED is famous for flare, I believe the problem
> is due to the poor lens system. I had lots of hard time in scanning high
> contrast slides. I remember a worse ... I sent the scanner to N*kon for
> through cleaning, they did charged me for that but there was zero improvement.
>
Ken Norton wrote:
> The Nikon 4x and 5x series scanners have a mirror. ... As it is below, dust
> will enter the film gate
> and settle downward onto the mirror.
>
> ... If the mirror is dirty, the image is slightly diffused--not at all
> unlike shooting a picture through a dirty filter.
> ... Besides, as I have been scanning mostly negs these days, the
> high-contrast of a Velvia slide isn't present so I don't get the diffusion
> AND the diffusion goes the other way--dark bleeds into light areas.
>
> Once in a while I'll get a streak on the images when a dust particle settles
> on the sensor, but can usually dislodge it with either a blast of air or by
> turning the scanner face down and rapping on the case--followed by more air
> blasts, etc.
>
> To put all this in perspective, this haze issue is about the only real issue
> with the Nikons. Other than the light-source which is more columnated
> (accentuating grain), the Nikons are built like tanks and have no bad
> habits. I can recommend them without hesitation.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|