Title: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000: An Unbiased Review
I also have an LS8000. I got it a week ago and was having the banding problem (as well as AF and various other problems). The super fine CCD mode did fix it but not I'm not having the problem even though I'm not using super fine CCD mod
Title: RE: filmscanners: LS-4000ED Dmax 4,2 or rather 2,3?
So, has anyone done any comparisons between the Polaroid SS120 and the Nikon LS8000 as far as shadow detail goes? What about an LS4000 vs. a SS4000?
TIA
Paul Wilson
Title: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
Well, I've decided to return mine and try the Polaroid. I was having the banding and AF problems but what really made the decision was how the Nikon seemed to accentuate the grain in B&W neg scans. Also, trying the Polaroid is a no lose situation since I
Title: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
My SS120 should also be here by Friday. In fact, I'll have both scanners for the weekend so I'll try to do some good comparisons. If it's as good as everyone says and I save $200 (paid $2600 for the lesser package, paid $2800 for the LS8000), I'll be ver
Title: RE: filmscanners: Nikon 8000ED
The Nikon does seem marginally sharper but the Polaroid seems to have better shadow detail (lower right side of the uncropped shot). However, it is a little tough to tell from the small .jpg.
Lawrence, I assume you'll post more conclusions when you have
Title: SS120 first impressions and a few questions.
Hello All,
I received my SS120 yesterday and my first impressions are mostly quite favorable vs. the LS-8000. I've not sure I had enough time with the LS8000 (or the SS120) to truly differentiate scan quality but both are very good. Also,
Title: RE: filmscanners: SS120 first impressions and a few questions.
Hi Rafe,
It was definitely buggy on my system. Actually, when it worked it worked well. When was the problem. It would often crash for no apparent reason. Also, it often had problems recognizing that there was a film h
Title: Polaroid Good As Gold Guarantee
Not that I'm returning my scanner, but I'm curious.
Does anyone know how this works? Normally the merchant I purchased the scanner from has a 14 day return policy. However, it sounds like Polaroid is cutting the merchant a break so therefore it should
Title: RE: filmscanners: SS120 & Nikon 8000 ... how do they work?
A Canon 100/2.8 macro lens has 12 elements so I don't think 14 elements for a scanner lens is
that hard to believe.
Paul Wilson
> -Original Message-
> From: Austin Franklin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursda
Title: RE: filmscanners: Link to Nikon 8000 banding example...
That's exactly the same as the banding I was getting.
Paul Wilson
> -Original Message-
> From: Lawrence Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 12:00 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: film
Title: RE: filmscanners: Link to Nikon 8000 banding example...
Actually, I sent it back. Mainly because I
decided that Digital ICE was well worth it for me. The SS120 did not have
any banding like that but I felt it was also not quite as sharp as the
Nikon.
Paul Wilson
-Original
Mess
Title: RE: filmscanners: Link to Nikon 8000 banding example...
I'm not sure when I'll be receiving my new 8000. It's on backorder and I got a price of $2800, so I'm willing to wait. However, I'll be trying the same slides that caused banding in the first place and I'll report as soon as I ca
Title: RE: filmscanners: Nikon Service
I spent A LOT of time on the phone with Nikon tech support when I had my first LS-8000. As a software engineer/dba with a lot of hardware experience, I've had a lot of experience with tech support in other areas. Finally, I've done my part to help Nikon
Title: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
This is a possibility. As I mentioned, when I had the LS8000, it did not always band. Sometimes it would and sometimes it wouldn't. Nikon tech support did mention moving the scanner to a different location to rul
Title: RE: filmscanners: Link to Nikon 8000 banding example...
First off, I don't think the banding is memory related. I was doing 35mm scans on a dual PIII 866 with 512MB and Ultra2 SCSI disks. This machine should have been more than capable of dealing with those file sizes.
Anyway, Lawren
Title: RE: filmscanners: My replacement 8000 is banding like the first one :-(
I no longer have my LS8000 as I've mentioned. However, Camera World did want my Nikon case # so they could return it. If anyone wants the case #, I'll supply it.
Paul Wilson
> -Original Message-
> From:
Title: Minolta Scan Multi Pro
Hello all,
I've pretty much given up on getting a Nikon LS-8000 based on Lawrence's experience. After having returned my LS8000 I got put on a waiting list for another (I tried a SS-120 in the meantime and decided I want Digital ICE). However, it looks like th
Title: RE: filmscanners: My 8000 does NOT band using Vuescan!
It should be pointed out that NikonScan has a workaround also. It's called Super Fine mode and tells the scanner to only use one line of the CCD, exactly the same as VueScan now does. The problem here is that this will make the sc
Title: RE: filmscanners: Constant crashes with Nikonscan 3.1/Coolscan 4000ED/W2K/Dual CPUs. Anyone got this combo to work?
I don't have the scanner anymore but I was using an LS-8000 on a dual PIII 866, running W2K server w/512MB of RAM. It also had a SCSI Ultra 160 disk sub-system. I was ab
I just wanted to note that RAID 0 is, in most cases, a bad idea. The reason
is that if you stripe your data across multiple disks and one fails, you
lose all the data. It's better to split the files up among many, smaller
logical drives. It's great from a performance standpoint but that's about
My point is that, with RAID 0, if one disk fails the data on all the disks
is lost. Also, MTBF is additive in this case because of what I previously
said. You've got more than one set of platters and heads to fail and any
one of them failing blows away the data. I realize the chances of proble
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.
Also,
Yes, we're talking about the Minolta Scan Multi Pro. If you dig deep enough
you will find the optical resolution for MF which is 3200 dpi. This should
explain the difference in CCD. In any event, 3200dpi is plenty for a scan
of a 6x7 transparency and the scans are excellent.
Paul Wilson
> --
Ed,
> The stepper motor can actually move at 9600 dpi, which
> is evenly divisible by both 4800 and 3200.
Does this mean they are doing something more than what is usually done for
interpolation? Also, I downloaded the trial version of the latest VueScan
and used it with my Minolta DSMP. An od
One more MA person. I'm in Chelmsford and work in Waltham. I didn't know
Polaroid has offices in Wayland.
Paul Wilson
> -Original Message-
> From: Hemingway, David J [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 2:30 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: filmscanne
Can anyone recommend a good 19" monitor? I'm currently using a 17" NEC
XV17+ which is a very good monitor that I'm happy with but I have a 2nd
system that needs a monitor and I'd like something bigger.
One of the things I like about the NEC is that it seems to hold detail in
shadows a lot better
Actually, David was talking about me when he mentioned the manual focus and
reboot problem. If I try to use the manual focus feature in the Minolta
software, the software will lock up when clicking ok after setting optimal
manual focus (according the black and white bars). I then have to kill th
Thanks everybody.
It turns out that Lacie's aren't as expensive as I though so I'm going to
look at one of those. NEC is also now made by Mitsubishi so I'll be looking
at those as well.
I had a Sony a few years ago that died very prematurely and just out of the
warranty. Sony refused to do any
No, medium format can only be scanned one image at a time (scan, reposition
film, scan). That makes it inconvenient but the film holder design
sacrifices this for holding the film flatter. In practice I've only wanted
to scan a 2 or 3 images from a roll of 6x7 anyway.
Paul Wilson
> -Origin
It's the Scan Multi Pro that does medium format.
Are you talking about scanning an image that's bigger than what the scanner
can handle (say 6x17) and then stitching in Photoshop? Or, are you talking
about the way the scanner gets to 4800 dpi for medium format?
Scanning a 6x17 would pretty much
No, that's not what I said.
Simply stated, the Minolta Scan Multi Pro (and the various versions of the
Scan Multi) do not require you to stitch pieces of an image together in
Photoshop when scanning medium format film. This is true up to 6x9cm film.
If you can a bigger format such as 6x12 or 6
an
> optical scan at
> that resolution from medium format film. As an operator, I
> am afraid that
> you do have to do something out of the ordinary to achieve
> the 4800 dpi
> optical resolution from the medium format film 6x9cm and under.
>
> -Original Mess
> The hardware is perfectly capable of scanning a 40 mm wide piece
> of Medium Format film at 4800 dpi using the medium format film
> holders. The key is that the lens moves in and out - it can scan
> 60 mm width at 4800 dpi or 40 mm width at 3200 dpi.
Alright, now I'm confused. So is the lens
Actually, it looks like I'm at least partially wrong on this. I didn't know
about this other film holder. Are there any pictures of it on the web?
They have versions for both the Scan Multi and the Scan Multi Pro.
Paul Wilson
> -Original Message-
> From: LAURIE SOLOMON [mailto:[EMAIL P
I built the PC I use to scan and run Photoshop. It's a dual PIII 866 with
1.25G, two 18G SCSI drives and so forth running Win2K. I don't have
experience with faster P4's but I really like dual processors and SCSI.
Why? Because I'm writing this email while my scanner is going and both
processors
Ezio's other advice was good. However, I have to disagree here. Win 98 and
ME are utter garbage. Win 2000 or XP are vastly better and are real 32-bit,
protected memory, multi-tasking operating systems and are vastly more stable
than 98 or ME. If drivers don't exist for a piece of hardware and
I was also on the waiting list at Camera World for months. I also cancelled
and bought a Minolta. I have no regrets.
Paul Wilson
> -Original Message-
> From: M. Denis Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 9:25 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [filmsc
Err, what other manufacturers? The only companies currently selling digial
SLR's are Nikon, Canon, Kodak and Fuji. Out the D-SLR's made by these
companies, the D-30 is the cheapest.
Paul Wilson
> -Original Message-
> From: Enoch's Vision, Inc. (Cary Enoch R...)
> I wonder why Canon is
I've owned the Nikon, Polaroid and Minolta (kept it) MF scanners. Out of
the 3 it's pretty difficult to say there is a worst one in terms of ultimate
scan quality. Based on features maybe but not scan quality. In terms of
working correctly, the Nikon is definitely the worst.
Paul Wilson
> You
David,
Maybe there's a potential for consulting here. You could consult with
companies on how to do customer service in this age of the internet. I've
been on the internet since since before the www and I've seen few other
companies do as good a job participating in newsgroups, mailing lists, e
40 matches
Mail list logo
