Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'm curious how flatbeds do for MF film vs. the (rather pricey) Nikon 9000 type scanners. What's your assessment of the quality of MF scans on this Microtek scanner? Scott Norm Aubin wrote: >Greetings, > >I've been using the Microtek i900 scanner for about a year now, and think >it's fantastic. I needed a scanner capable of LF negative/slide scanning, >medium format scanning, and 35mm scanning. I also didn't want glass between >the neg and the scanning head. > >This one gives me all of that and more - 8x10 and panoramic negative >scanning, legal pad reflective scanning, OCR, true 16 bit color scanning, >batch scanning, and 3200 DPI resolution, with 6400 interpolated (never >used!). It even includes the calibration negative and print, a $50.00 >value. It also comes with Silverfast 6.0, which I'm concluding is different >from but as capable as Vuescan, although I will admit it's barely >user-tolerant. The 3200 DPI scan gives me (roughly) a 10x15 print if I >don't crop, since I print at 360 DPI on my Epson printer > >This isn't to say that I might not buy a Nikon or Minolta scanner for >dedicated 35mm work sometime in the future, but for the foreseeable time >this works very well indeed. I've used the Nikon 4000 and 8000 scanners, >and they are better for dedicated 35mm scanning, and if you have the slide >feeder they're even better yet. If all I was doing was scanning 35mm >slides/negatives, I'd have gotten the Nikon, it's enough better at the price >point to make it the better choice, but when you add in the rest of the >stuff, then for $599.00 there's no comparison. > >I'm told that Epson has a flat bed scanner that is comparable in capability >at a similar price point, but I don't know this for a fact. It's worth >checking their web site too. > >Search the web for reviews on the i900, it's gotten mostly very good >response. > >Best of light, >Norm > > > > > > >>------------------------------ >> >>Message: 26 >>Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:52:04 EST >>From: SonC@aol.com >>Subject: Re: [Leica] OT - Konica Minolta Scanners and ??? >>To: lug@leica-users.org >>Message-ID: <e4.790e6e1f.310922d4@aol.com> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" >> >> >> >>In a message dated 1/25/2006 12:43:04 P.M. Central Standard Time, >>kennybod@mac.com writes: >> >> >> >>> They indeed have competition - >>> >>> >>And, from what other folks have said, and reviews I've read, the >>Microtek's are very good. Sonny, I think, is using one, and spoke >>highly of it. >> >>Ken >> >>I use Microtek flatbed scanners, and the 900i is quite good >>on medium >>format and 4x5 negs. It uses a tray system for negatives >>that inserts in the front >> >>I have not tried it with BW negative in 35mm. >> >>There is no digital ice for negatives, and I'm not too >>pleased with ice on >>positives. >> >> >> >>For 35mm I use a Coolscan 5000 >> >> >> >>Regards, >>Sonny >>http://www.sonc.com >>Natchitoches, Louisiana >>Oldest continuous settlement in La Louisiane >>igaliti, liberti, crawfish >> >> > > > -- Pics @ http://www.adrenaline.com/snaps Leica M6TTL, Bessa R, Nikon FM3a, Nikon D70, Rollei AFM35 (Jihad Sigint NSA FBI Patriot Act)