Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks for the added information, Henning. I have no experience using the Nikon LS-2000 or Polaroid Sprintscan 4000, I was responding to the subject from a theoretical basis. As I stated, my scanner is the older model Polaroid Sprintscan 35E/S, which was in my evaluation the best scanner for my purposes that I could afford at the time I bought it almost 4 years ago. I didn't see your comparative report ... since the archives seem to be non-functional at present, I'd like to see it if you still have it handy somewhere to send. Certainly, the buyer of scanning equipment must be wary of getting what they need to do the job they have in mind. Test, test and test again to be sure you get a machine that does the job you need! Godfrey >The present Nikon LS-2000, intrinsically, and enhanced because of its >multisampling capability does a better job of producing a decent slide scan >due to its lower shadow noise than the Polaroid 4000, as I mentioned in a >comparative report a while back. The extra detail available with the >Polaroid is not enough to compensate for its bad software and more limited >dynamic range. The LS-2000 is still a better value if your interest is in >slide scanning. > >Adveritised Dmax and dynamic range capabilty are generally nowhere near the >truth, and dpi capability is also generally less. Caveat emptor!