At 07:46 PM 7/16/01 -0700, Winsor Crosby wrote: >If I am not mistaken that is the one that MacWorld in the US did not >like because its tested resolution was no better than a good 1200 and >there was a red bloom along edges. I already own one of these, and have reported on it extensively. It's not a *great* scanner, but at $150, with TPU, it's a steal. rafe b.
- filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 rafeb
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 Stan McQueen
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 rafeb
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 Pat Perez
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 Winsor Crosby
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 rafeb
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 Tomasz Zakrzewski
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA ... rafeb
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @Comp... Terry Carroll
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @... Raphael Bustin
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @... Stan McQueen
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @... Terry Carroll
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @... Jim Snyder
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 Stan McQueen
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA $150 rafeb
- Re: filmscanners: 1640SU @CompUSA ... James L. Sims