Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
filmscanners: Minolta Multi Pro
>Stylistically, I'd call the Minolta boring rather than ugly but it's
>made out of metal whereas the Polaroid is at least partially
>plastic. The Minolta is also A LOT smaller and quieter than the
>Polaroid. Neither effect scan quality but they do make living with
>the scanner easier.
We are talking about the Minolta Multi Pro here are we not? Why is it
being compared to Nikon and Polaroid. Is no one concerned that while
the Polaroid uses a very expensive 10K pixels per line CCD and gives
4000 dpi for all formats, the Minolta claims 4800 dpi with a 7260
pixels per line CCD. How do they do that? Minolta also does not give
the optical resolution on their site for the 2 1/4 film format, but
gives 4800 dpi "interpolated". On other scanners interpolated
resolution is 2 or 3 times the optical resolution. It is often said
that it is a false number and should be ignored. What is the
Minolta's optical resolution on medium format? Is it actually about
2000 dpi? Why would one buy a multi format scanner to get the same
size file regardless of format. I don't understand.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
|
