The Coolscan IV does not have multi-sampling, you have to buy the 4000 for that.
The Coolscan does have the best ICE3 though. I think if you use vuescan you cant use ICE/ROC/GEM though, so I say the OEM software has to figure in your decision. The Nikon stuff is pretty good, but doesn't have pre-made film profiles. You cant use ICE3 on true B&W either, in case you didn't know. I would buy the Coolscan in an instant (and I did - I got the 4000!). > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:david@;chang-sang.com] > Sent: 30 October 2002 13:46 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: 35mm film scanners > > > Pal, > > You're probably thinking of the Scan Dual II and the Scan > Elite II. If that is the case, the Scan Dual II is an older > model. I've got the Minolta Dimage Scan Elite II and it's a > very good machine. DPI of 2820 and ICE, ROC and GEM all > included in the kit. Batch scanning of slides > (mounted) and film strips is a big plus. Works just fine > with VueScan and the Minolta software isn't half bad either. > > Up to 16x oversampling which is a plus if you don't mind > waiting 1/2 hour or longer for one scan - I rarely go above > 2x sampling. > > I believe the Scan Dual II has roughly the same DPI but does > not have the ICE, ROC or GEM capability. > > Cheers, > Dave > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:14:28 +0100 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: 35mm film scanners > > > Looking for a film scanner for 35mm. How about the Nikon > LS-40 and the Minolta Dimage scan Dual II and Dimage dual > scan III (the two Minolta scanners cost the same - whats the > difference between them?)? How do these scanners compare to > the Nikon LS-4000 (too expensive). Will they give credit for > the Epson 2100 (2200 US) printer? Plan of using the new > 3200DPI Epson flatbed scanner for MF. > > Pål > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . > > >
