OOops, let's try that again with a few corrections to those dpi & lpmm
statements....
--------------
Actual resolution will be interesting. 4000 dpi is literally 78.7
lpmm. But 4000 dpi scanners common on this list deliver something like
60-65 lpmm. 5400 dpi is a literal 106.3 lpmm. Proportional to the 4000
dpi numbers, the Minolta would yield 81-88 lpmm. Diffraction, etc. may
reduce those and the usual "sharpness is percieved as MTF at a certain
resolution rather than a system's max lpmm" caveats are
warranted. [Scanner math experts are invited to flesh that out ;-) ] If
Minolta's optics are worthy of their sensor & they deliver the goods on
color & d-max, then it will be a tempting machine.
Will it be the last ever affordable high res 35mm film scanner?
Bob G
At 09:57 AM 4/24/2003, you wrote:
>Les Berkley wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the heads-up. Isn't 5400 dpi a bit of overkill though?
>
>Depends what you want to do with your scans, and how much time, money and
>space you want to dedicate to them. Perhaps the biggest benefit should be
>greater potential immunity to grain aliasing problems. And 699GBP is cheap,
> really, if all else works well.
>
> > Any
> > idea if this will be available in the States? I'll be in Londinium in
> > September (I think); maybe I can check one out at the, er, "stockist" or
> > whatever you call it?
>
>It's bound to be available in the US and probably @$699 or less. I'd avoid
>buying here, it's one of the most expensive places on Earth.
>
> > At least you haven't got that Godless metric money yet <g>!
>
>Or money of any sort whatsoever, now you mention it...
>
>Regards
>
>Tony Sleep -
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
