>I appreciate all the feedback to date. It seems that the SS4000 is the "tried
>and true" choice, a scanner with a track record. Roger's point about software
>being no substitute for resolution/dpi is well taken. Does the stated
>manufacturer's dpi spec. correlate exactly with how many lpi you get in the
>final scan? (I noted in a Pop Photo review the IV ED's "optical resolution"
>was 53.3 lpi while the nikon 4000 was 60 lpi, so despite having roughly 75%
>of the 4000's stated dpi it achieved roughly 90% of its optical resoving
>power...hmmmm, is this a meaningful test?) The SS4000, not being a recently
>released scanner was unfortunately not included in their testing.
lp/mm and MTF are the meaningful resolution tests. Note that
53.3 lp/mm=1534 lp/i. dp/i is not a meaningful resolution test.
>What would really be nice at this point would be a head to head comparison
>between the new Canon 4000 and the SS4000.
<http://www.imaging-resource.com/> compared new Canon 4000, LS4000, & SS4000.