There is DOF problem with the Nikon but most of the negative film strips are
flat enough, the problem is the mounted (non glass) slides. The auto film
strip loader of Nikon is great, I don't see much problem with slides and
negatives in strip form.
When I was looking at the Imacon specifications, I found they don't have
dust removal, it is a deal killer. Many of the slides and negatives I have
seen are badly stored and handled, it would take lots of time for touch up.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Adler" <rgacpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> Resolution is better. The film is held flat and there is no Newtonian
> glass
> in-between the film and the camera. Ergo better, sharper resolution. Plus
> no warping of the negative which often happens. Finally, the distance
> between the camera and the film is precisely constant on the Imacons
> whereas on the other, non-drum scanners, the plastic trays and the way
> they
> are handled introduces significant, IMO, focus aberrations.
> Bob
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:48 AM, C.H.Ling <ch_photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> 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/
|