Agree on the DMax as the Nikon has serious flare problem anyway. But I doubt
the resolution will be much better as not much film/camera system can
provide more than 4000dpi resolution. To keep the file size smaller I
usually scan at 3000dpi-16 bit.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Piers Hemy" <piers@xxxxxxxx>
> There is no doubt in my mind (having a 4000ED, and having seen the results
> of an Imacon scan) that the Imacon scanners, even the older models, can
> squeeze much more out of the film image, in resolution and DMax. You have,
> however, put your finger on a key advantage of the higher-end Nikon 35mm
> scanners, the ability to accept the batch feeders. I don't know if the X5
> can do batch scanning, my only experience was with the Precision II, but
> there is an active and helpful user group at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imaconusers It ain't quite the OM list, but
> then what could be?
>
> If you don't need batch scanning and do need MF scanning, an older Imacon
> beats a Nikon 8000/9000 for quality and price.
>
> Piers
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|