On 6/3/2013 12:56 AM, SwissPace wrote:
> My canoscan 2700F was the worst thing I bought, I devoted many many hours
> trying to get decent scans from it, assuming it was my fault, tried a
> nikonscan and bought a v700 and realised it wasn't. Glad they sorted
> everything for the next version.
Actually, they did get it together for the next version, but that was the
2710F, still 2700 dpi, but without the
problems. I still have one around somewhere. It makes good scans, and honestly,
the extra resolution of the next version
yet, the 4000F, doesn't amount to much with a lot of film. If film, lens and
focus aren't first rate, there's no
practical difference. The big advantages of the 4000F are an IR channel for
dust removal and automatic film movement.
Previewing four slides or or up to six frames of negs at a time, setting each
and then leaving it to do the full
scanning of at least two passes per frame unattended is wonderful. As far as I
could tell from reviews, the V700 and the
Canon 9950F are neck and neck in scan IQ. For a shot with good film, lens and
technique and/or large DR, the 4000F is
clearly able to pull out more finest detail and tonal range than the 9950F.
Scanning 12 slides or 30 frames at a time is
a big advantage of the flat bed.
D.P.I Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|