Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 




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

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

RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000 ED or Polaroid Sprintscan 120 ??

I wouldn't consider a scanner that didn't have Digital ICE. Not only that,
but the Nikon scanner has Digital ROC (Reconstruction of Color) that does an
incredible job of restoring color to faded images. It even works on certain
new over/under exposed images as well. It also includes Digital GEM (Grain
Equalization & Management). This reduces the grain when you have to enlarge
images and grain becomes apparent. This is one of the first scanners that
bundles all three of these important features into one scanner. You can find
more information on these features at:

In my biased opinion, the Nikon is the clear choice between these two

Jack Phipps 
Applied Science Fiction

-----Original Message-----
From: David Freedman [mailto:dpfreedman@worldnet.att.net]
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 4:43 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: filmscanners: Nikon 8000 ED or Polaroid Sprintscan 120 ??

Ah, isn't competition wonderful?  In advance of the aggrssively-priced Nikon
Coolscan 8000 ED, it appears that Polaroid has lopped approx. $1,200 off the
suggested list price of their Sprintscan 120. It's now priced at $2,795
rather than the original $3,995. This according to a Polaroid press release
coming out of PMA.

So, here's the question:  With prices now nearly equal, is there a
compelling reason to prefer one over the other?  I'm eager to get my order
in for one of these scanners and am leaning toward the Nikon (ED glass,
software bundle, etc) but I may have overlooked something significant that
could tilt the balance toward the Polaroid. Any thoughts?


Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.