I have owned the 5400 mk1 and the scan dual 4 (cheap but poor). I found
that the 5400 would sometimes leave the tray inside the scanner and I
would have to poke the manual eject hole with pin to free the tray.
Other times it would miss-calculate? the tray position and would start
to scan too ealy and miss half of each slide not scan the last shoot at
all. Ejecting and switching off had no effect it needed the pin the the
hole again... Sometimes it would not accept the tray at all. Pin in the
hole again. But after each problem it worked fine.
I have so far had no problems with the coolscan 9000ed other than you
really need the glass holder to get flat medium format scans - somthing
thats standard with the multi scan pro. I did some tests on the 5400mk1
against the 9000ed. sharpness wise the 9000ed is a little better the
most telling difference is ccd noise. The 5400 using 16 passes is STILL
more noisy than the 9000ed on 1 pass. The 5400 is faster at scanning and
with a fast computer (3Ghz, 3GB ram, 1000rpm hard disks) the scan times
for 16 passes is less that 16 times the time for 1 pass. However, with
the 9000ed on the same computer 16 passes is so slow I standardised on
only 4 - and it still takes almost 4 hours to scan a roll of 120! 16
passes is simply crazy. Against the 9000ed - its very over priced in the
uk - (but a last member managed to get me one from the US for about half
the uk price) and the glass holder *should* be standard its nessisary.
Word of warning about the 9000ed on switch on it auto calibrates don't
switch your computer on or connect the firewire cable *during* this
calibration sequence it seems to abort it or calibrate incorrectly and I
got stupidly under exposed scans.
James
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|