This may not be much of a recommendation because I've only been at this sport
(scanning) about three months. The Agfa Arcus 1200 is my first serious scanner.
I'm doing b&w and color negs; both 4x5 and 35mm. I love it. I never see the
model discussed here so I wonder if I've got an unknown jewel or terrible taste
(like a whale omelet?) <vbg>
The only thing it doesn't do that I know someday I will want is to take about
50 slides while I go out for a sandwich. For everything else, right now I'm
having the time of my life!
At 7/26/01 06:22 PM -0700, you wrote:
>Sometimes I feel as thick as a whale omelet. I am
>considering a few different flatbed scannes for use
>for scanning 120 film (6x6). I was thinking that
>Silverfast *might* be something I want to add to the
>equation. I looked at their website and noticed they
>charge vastly different prices depending on which
>scanner one owns. Can someone explain to me why this
>is, other than that they can?
>I am looking at the Epson 1640 SU Photo, the Epson
>Expression 1680, Agfa Arcus T1200, and Microtek 8700.
>I am concerned with Epson's 1640 really only resolving
>800 dpi in practice (or so I have read) and would hope
>the more expensive models in the above list, though
>mostly rated at 1200, would result in better scans. I
>note the Agfa and Microtek have glass-free scanning
>for transparencies, so that *seems* a plus. In fact,
>the Microtek and Agfa seem like the same scanner.
>I am purely a hobbyist, but darn it, I'd like to be
>able to make scans suitable for big prints. That's why
>I'm shooting 6x6 now. I have no interest in a
>flatbed's capabilities with 35, as I am quite pleased
>with my Scan Elite, so that isn't a factor.
>Does anyone have any food for my thoughts?
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger