Hi James,
I found your review short but vey clear, for the color it is same as my
experience and also my friend who owned the M*nolta scanner. I had tried a
Scan Speed (the 2800dpi M*nolta top of the line at that time) for two weeks,
the color was not as accurate and under saturated for both slide and
negative (with original software). At that time the resoluton of M*nolta was
better than my N*kon LS2000 but the color of LS2000 was much more accurate
(for slide).
I have a 4000ED for some years, compare to LS2000 it has slightly better
color accuracy and much higher resolution, just enable N*kon color
management and no calibration is required to get accuracy color (for slide).
It also has very low noise and good shadow details but it possess the same
problem you mentioned for the 5400, it has flare that shown on the drak area
besides the white. The scanning speed is very fast too but it is well known
for shallow DOF, to scan at full resolution I have to focus at a few points
on the slide and set the value in between to get a better result.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: <jking@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
> i have the older scan elite 5400 but I mainly scan slides and some
> kodachromes
> its okish for me using vuescan, I find the saturation low and the edge
> definition is not what I hoped for. Few slides look truly sharp without
> photo shop unsharp mask even though most of the shots I take look fine
> under a light table and are taken on a tripod with appature and mirror
> prefire @ f8 or f11. The infra red cleaning is a nice feature and the scan
> speeds using usb 2 are quite fast. @5400 dpi 48 bit colour you will make
> large files! 200MB 48 bit color and 250 ish if you include the infra red.
> Its well built - mostly metal but does get a little hot with long sessions
> 4 hours or more. The slide holder allows you to quickly change slides
> without ejecting the holder - nice feature. Its scan quality is better
> than the scan dual 4 which is noisy and has no IR channel. I have no
> experience of the n?k*n to compare it to. I find that it takes a while for
> the cathode inside to warm up and become stable. Getting the exposure
> right is a bit of an art. Increasing the exposure time on the scanner can
> quite quickly make light colours white and increasing the exposure a
> little more results in whites becomming noisy light blue/greys. e.g. at
> exposure 1.3 whites are fine and by 1.5 there is slight clipping and by
> 1.8 its bad...
> at exposure 1.3 you lose the last 2 or 3 wdeges on an IT8 slide colour
> calibration target even @ 48 bit 16 scans. Some flare evident in bright
> white areas next to dark areas.
>
> Summary good at extracting detail from light areas of the slide, some
> flare, poor at shadow detail over the last half a stop on the slide, edge
> sharpness and saturation not enought for me. IR cleaning is very useful
> slide holder allows fast swapping of slides.
>
> disclaimer:
> This is my experience of the *original* scan elite 5400 the mark II may be
> quite different. Also no medium format means I have outgrown it.
>
> Regards
> James
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|