The Polaroid included a glassless carrier for 35mm with no frame
divisions for use with various panoramic formats. I would assume that
the Microtek was the same. If not it is a simple matter of removing
the frame divisions from a regular carrier and filing a new notch in
the end to signal the scanner for its scanning behavior. People did
this regularly with the 6x6 and 6x7 carriers to scan 6x9. Carriers
with glass were available at extra cost.
I only contacted Microtek once when I switched from OS9 to OSX on my
Mac and there was no longer any software available from Polaroid. I
got a prompt, polite reply that the Microtek software would not work
with my Polaroid. That is when I started using VueScan which works
fine with the 120.
Just a precaution though. You know how in the last few days some of
the last digital holdouts admitted they were no longer using their
OMs? Even though I have plenty of film in a couple of sizes to scan I
mostly go out and shoot new digital images. You may end up using a
new scanner much less than you anticipate right now.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Aug 9, 2005, at 6:31 PM, <bs.pearce@xxxxxxx> <bs.pearce@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
> Winsor is the first reliable comment about the Mikrotek I've seen. I
> understand that it has a softer light source, and handles B&W
> better. I
> don't know if it requires a glass carrier for Xpan, but that's a
> question
> I'd like answered, Winsor. I also don't know about Microtek service,
> although Polaroids was apparently quite good.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|