Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/07/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Doesn't mean that they are all good though. There is a new medium format film scanner due in a few months, the current Pacific Image one is badly regarded (and you have to cut 6x7 into single frames to scan). Given that Nikon and Minolta had done the design and manufacturing of good scanners I guess that there is only a small market which is why they stopped production? Which in turn shows why the used prices for Nikon/Minolta film scanners are still high..... john ________________________________________ I have to admit to being surprised that there are still so many available. I had very good results scanning 120 film with an HP flatbed scanner 10 years ago, and prices on those could only go down. Gaa! I remember buying a B&W flatbed scanner in the early 90's (only opaque scanning, no transparency), and it seems like it was about $500. Regards, Jeffery On Jul 17, 2012, at 1:14 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote: > 22 different film scanners on the B&H site. > 70 flat beds. > There is a LUG myth that a scanner without the names Nikon or Minolta or > Hasselblad on it does not exist. And should be widely Ignored. > A " baseless fabric of a vision " [Tempest] > > I think a film scanner made by a company such as "Pacific Image" just may > be > able to scan film without shreading it. One made by them cost $1,399.00. > It's called the Pacific Image PrimeFilm 120 Multi-Format CCD Film Scanner. > They make a dedicated slide scanner which looks good to me for $479.95. > I'll > take that one too please gift wrapped. > And they make Pacific Image PF7250U 35mm Film and Slide Scanner which cost > $269. A perfect stocking stuffer. > My next scanner would be one of these. Brand new. From Pacific Image. > And I can't be more specific than Pacific. I'm sure there are some worthy > ones from Atlantic. > But I'll stick with Pacific. > > Mark William Rabiner >> >> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 Chris Saganich <csaganich at gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> I'll continue using my Minolta DiMage untill that gives >>> out like the Polaroid Sprintscan before. The real killer is software and >>> cable compatibility. >> ========================================================================= >> What went wrong with the Sprintscan? We are still using one with an old >> Mac >> at the office. >> >> Alan >>