Re: Scanner: which one?
I just ordered the Minolta Scan Dual IV yesterday, it wasn't very expensive and I have heard good things baout it. /Henri Thibs wrote: What about a Microtek ArtixScan 1800f. It is a film scanner but only 1800dpi. Or what about a Canon Canoscan 5200F (it is 2400x4800 dpi) ? Thibouille Collin R Brendemuehl a écrit : At 02:52 2004.12.08 -0500, you wrote: Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 08:34:50 +0100 From: Thibs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Scanner: which one? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm looking for a scanner. I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one. I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back. Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to. I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film one may follow if budget does too. Any clue? Canon? Epson? Thibouille I really like the Epson 3170. It treats me well. The top will handle medium format as well as 35. Collin "You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the relationship the greater the impact." Howard Hendricks
Re: Scanner: which one?
What about a Microtek ArtixScan 1800f. It is a film scanner but only 1800dpi. Or what about a Canon Canoscan 5200F (it is 2400x4800 dpi) ? Thibouille Collin R Brendemuehl a écrit : At 02:52 2004.12.08 -0500, you wrote: Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 08:34:50 +0100 From: Thibs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Scanner: which one? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm looking for a scanner. I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one. I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back. Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to. I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film one may follow if budget does too. Any clue? Canon? Epson? Thibouille I really like the Epson 3170. It treats me well. The top will handle medium format as well as 35. Collin "You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the relationship the greater the impact." Howard Hendricks
Re: Scanner: which one?
8400F is about US$140 at BHPHOTO.. in NYC. Anyone using the more expensive 9950F? Otis Wright Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Thibs wrote on 08.12.04 8:34: I'm looking for a scanner. I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one. I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back. Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to. I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film one may follow if budget does too. Any clue? Canon? Epson? I have just bought Canon 8400F which can scan 12 frames of 35mm strips, 4 mounted transpariences or 1 frame of 120 film. It has FARE Level 3 (Canon's equivalent of ICE, GEM and ROC), so no more problems with scratches and dust, 3200 dpi optical resolution and high power, moving fluorescent lamp, which usually gives better final results than fixed ones with all-surface lighting. It was about 250 Euro in Poland including VAT, so not that expensive.
Re: Scanner: which one?
Thibs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'm looking for a scanner. >I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one. >I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back. > >Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to. >I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film one may follow if budget does too. > >Any clue? Canon? Epson? I bought a Visioneer 7300 a few months ago after reading several favorable reviews. Mine was $79.00 and a manufacturer's rebate effectively cut $20.00 off that. I use it mainly for scanning documents but I've done a couple of photos (prints) and it's pretty good (probably very good for the price). -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Scanner: which one?
Thibs wrote on 08.12.04 8:34: > I'm looking for a scanner. > I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one. > I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back. > > Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to. > I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film one may follow if budget does too. > > Any clue? Canon? Epson? I have just bought Canon 8400F which can scan 12 frames of 35mm strips, 4 mounted transpariences or 1 frame of 120 film. It has FARE Level 3 (Canon's equivalent of ICE, GEM and ROC), so no more problems with scratches and dust, 3200 dpi optical resolution and high power, moving fluorescent lamp, which usually gives better final results than fixed ones with all-surface lighting. It was about 250 Euro in Poland including VAT, so not that expensive. -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Scanner: which one?
At 02:52 2004.12.08 -0500, you wrote: Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2004 08:34:50 +0100 From: Thibs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Scanner: which one? Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm looking for a scanner. I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one. I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back. Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to. I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film one may follow if budget does too. Any clue? Canon? Epson? Thibouille I really like the Epson 3170. It treats me well. The top will handle medium format as well as 35. Collin "You impress at a distance, but you impact a life up close. The closer the relationship the greater the impact." Howard Hendricks
Scanner: which one?
I'm looking for a scanner. I'm very budget limited so it'll probably be flatbed one. I know Canon do affordable (almost) flatbeds with film back. Of course it is nowhere near a film scanner but I do not expect it to. I absolutely need a normal scanner. Film one may follow if budget does too. Any clue? Canon? Epson? Thibouille
