Ken,
I really don't think you'll see any real difference in your scans going from
a Coolscan V to a 5000. Both have the same resolution, with the only real
difference being that the V does 14 bit scans and the 5000 does 16 bit. Its
the same difference between the earlier 8000ED and later 9000ED scanners. I
have an 8000 and have used a 9000 that belongs to a client quite a lot.
There is ZERO difference in the scans. None. If you have a good working V,
don't waste any money on the 5000.
--
Chris Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana
260-437-8990
http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-Crawford/48229272798
Become a fan on Facebook
On 9/18/11 7:52 PM, "Ken Norton" <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The quality difference between a Walgreens scan and a full-blown 4000ppi
> scan from my Nikon is an issue of not even being in the same solar system,
> much less same planet.
>
> For portrait/wedding work, I'm just using Millerlab for processing and
> scanning. Cost is higher, but I have no time investment to worry about. But
> I'm really close to upgrading from the V-ED to the 5000.
>
> AG
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|