ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Canon 4000 scanner VS Nikon LS4000 >Mikael



Just to clarify, I wasn't questioning your knowledge in this area,, but 
trying to understand why Nikon would make such a claim if it was a 
completely incorrect statement of functionality.

Perhaps the original intent was to design this differently, or perhaps 
there was enough ambiguity in the manual that when it got translated to 
English, the information got mangled.  Clearly, what Nikon states (in 
their English manual) in not correct.  I wonder if they have corrected 
this in more recent versions?

Art

EdHamrick@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 11/24/2001 6:05:20 AM EST, artistic@ampsc.com writes:
> 
> 
>>I think someone just quoted Nikon's own manual in one of the groups
>> (maybe this one) and it stated that the LED brightness was altered
>>
> 
> Many people have pointed out on this mailing list that Nikon's
> documentation says that analog gain changed the LED
> intensity.  However, it clearly doesn't - it changes the CCD
> exposure time.
> 
> I've stated the reasons for this many times in this mailing
> list, and you can search the archives of this mailing list on:
> 
>   http://phi.res.cse.dmu.ac.uk/Filmscan/
> 
> Regards,
> Ed Hamrick
> 
> .
> 
> 






 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.