On Wed, Jul 18, 2012, at 09:59 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
> > Yeah, no point scanning with the V700 above 2400, just more pixels and no
> > more real resolution from my experience. Anyhow 2400 is plenty for MF
> > (~30Mpixels).
>
> Agreed. The V700/V750 has about 2400 in real resolution. That's
> actually fine, though, because most films tend to top out at that
> point. Scanning at a higher resolution has the benefit of reducing
> grain aliasing, but doesn't really gain you much in resolution. For
> medium and large formats, these scanners seem to have established
> themselves well among the hybrid photographers.
Is there a difference between optical resolution and "real resolution"?
If you're saying "You don't need more that 2400," I'm with you. If
you're saying, "Scan at 2400, 3200, or 6400 and it is still only 2400"
with a scanner that has the spec of 6400 optical, then I don't
understand.
Also, it seems like you might have a different explanation for the
phenomenon that Dawid is experiencing, namely, that film is the limiter.
> Pros, who still shoot medium-format film for event-wedding-portrait
> photography, are pretty much locked in with the Nikon 9000 and Minolta
> Multi Pro.
I found out about this scanner on a list of folks who are worried about
an impending demise of the Nikon and Minolta scanners.
Joel W.
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|