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: New Nikon performance



> In a message dated 6/8/2001 6:14:53 AM EST, kingphoto@mindspring.com
writes:
>
> > Not quite sure how to answer this assertion since it goes against
> >  everything I've read and my own personal experience.
>
> Don't believe everything you read (including what I write <smile>).
>
> > I guess all I
> >  can say is scans on my LS-30 without ICE compared to scans on my
Agfa
> >  T-2500 are quite different in terms of dust and scratches.
>
> My experience is that scanners with better focus show more dust
> than scanners without good focus.  For instance, take a SprintScan
4000
> and a Nikon LS-4000 and compare the raw scans.  They show exactly
> the same dust spots if you use the same slide on both, and both have
> excellent focus.  If you take the same slide and scan it on almost
> any flatbed, it won't show as much dust, since the dust spots get
> blurred.
>
> The whole "Nikon scanners accentuate dust" thing is just FUD
> (fear, uncertainty and doubt) from vendors competing with Nikon.
>
> Regards,
> Ed Hamrick

I would certainly like to believe what you write in this instance Ed.
:)  Of course it follows that dust will be less sharp at lower
resolution and/or focus, but the T-2500 I use for comparison is on par
with the LS-30 in both regards.  The speced res at 2500 is lower, but
in actual scans it appears to render image detail and grain about as
well as the Nikon LS-30.  In fact I have the feeling (untested) it may
be slightly higher res in real scans.

I've seen the so-called "collimated light effect" with my own LS-30,
but of course it's possible I'm misinterpreting what I see.  I'm not
out to bash Nikon, I think their scanners are brilliant.  But I have a
lot of Kodachromes I'm waiting to scan and I'd like to get an idea if
the new Nikons are going to sneak in some problems here or not.  Dane
reports no problems at all with thousands of Kodachromes scanned on an
LS-2000, and I wonder what I'm doing wrong.  <g>  Some, not all, of my
KC's get a case of the "measles" with ICE used in the LS-30, and more
pronounced dust and scratches with ICE off than with the T-2500.

It would be interesting to see the comparison you mention.  Any chance
of posting it?

Dave




 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.