I'm considering buying this scanner (a flatbed scanner with slide adapter)
but I don't find in the characteristics how much time it takes to scan a
slide/film (I suspect much...)
Next I'd like to hear some experience - I had a negative experience some
years ago with Epson Perfection 2400 photo (a flatbed scanner with slide
adapter too) because it lost details in the shadows. Now I agree dedicated
scanners like Nikon's LSx000 are better, but the price is very high compared
to this one (ranging from 168 to 220 euros)
TIA
il barbi
"il barbi" <angeieri.barboggi@ngi.it> wrote in message
news:h2arvr$e5e$1@nnrp.ngi.it...
> I'm considering buying this scanner (a flatbed scanner with slide adapter)
> but I don't find in the characteristics how much time it takes to scan a
> slide/film (I suspect much...)
> Next I'd like to hear some experience - I had a negative experience some
> years ago with Epson Perfection 2400 photo (a flatbed scanner with slide
> adapter too) because it lost details in the shadows. Now I agree dedicated
> scanners like Nikon's LSx000 are better, but the price is very high
> compared to this one (ranging from 168 to 220 euros)
> TIA
> il barbi
>
For best results you need to use a dedicated film/slide scanner, Nikons are
the best.
On the Canon 8800F, it is a flatbed scanner with a built-in light in the
lid. Although the scanner can do 4800 DPI, it is scanning (for 35mm film) a
one inch area of a 8 1/2 inch wide platen. The results will be a little
soft.
I have a Canon 8400F (an earlier model), it does OK for 35 mm, but I would
not use it from more that the
occasional scan for making a print.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:00:40 +0200, "il barbi"
<angeieri.barboggi@ngi.it> wrote:
>I'm considering buying this scanner (a flatbed scanner with slide adapter)
>but I don't find in the characteristics how much time it takes to scan a
>slide/film (I suspect much...)
>Next I'd like to hear some experience - I had a negative experience some
>years ago with Epson Perfection 2400 photo (a flatbed scanner with slide
>adapter too) because it lost details in the shadows. Now I agree dedicated
>scanners like Nikon's LSx000 are better, but the price is very high compared
>to this one (ranging from 168 to 220 euros)
>TIA
>il barbi
>
As CSM1 said, you need a dedicated slide scanner to get the best
results. No flatbed will give the the same results as a slide scanner
will.
I have a Canon 9950F flatbed which will scan slides and it does
okay, but I have a Polaroid SprintScan 4000 for slides. The
SprintScan was a low priced slide scanner, and it is nowhere as good
as the Nikon scanners, but it still does a better job with slides than
my Canon does.
On Jun 30, 1:59*am, Talker <Tal...@thegood.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:00:40 +0200, "il barbi"
>
> <angeieri.barbo...@ngi.it> wrote:
> >I'm considering buying this scanner (a flatbed scanner with slide adapter)
> >but I don't find in the characteristics how much time it takes to scan a
> >slide/film (I suspect much...)
> >Next I'd like to hear some experience - I had a negative experience some
> >years ago with Epson Perfection 2400 photo (a flatbed scanner with slide
> >adapter too) because it lost details in the shadows. Now I agree dedicated
> >scanners like Nikon's LSx000 are better, but the price is very high compared
> >to this one (ranging from 168 to 220 euros)
> >TIA
> >il barbi
>
> * * *As CSM1 said, you need a dedicated slide scanner to get the best
> results. *No flatbed will give the the same results as a slide scanner
> will.
> * * *I have a Canon 9950F flatbed which will scan slides and it does
> okay, but I have a Polaroid SprintScan 4000 for slides. *The
> SprintScan was a low priced slide scanner, and it is nowhere as good
> as the Nikon scanners, but it still does a better job with slides than
> my Canon does.
>
> Talker
Actually the SprintScan was one of the best scanners of its time,
early 2000's, it is comparable to the Nikon LS2000 with more res.
I have had success with the Epson V700, very comparable, a little
better, to my Nikon LS2000. Are the latest Nikon's (LS5000, LS9000)
better, probably, haven't tested them. When you work with the
software, you can get very good shadow detail, just don't use the auto
settings or the default curve setting. Some time should be spent
aligning the focus of the V700, very manual, but greatly helps the
results, follow setup instructions. It is a good scanner for $500.
Lesser Epsons have not been as good.
I have a Canoscan 8800, that we use for chart scanning, very fast
scanner, but can't vouch for its slide scanning capabilities, didn't
come with the slide adapter. Good flatbed for the price. The V700 is
also very good for flatbed scanning.
I have been very pleased with mine but I use it very little to do film. I
am mostly digital now so I need the film capability only occasionally when
I retrieve a slide from the archive. I replaced both an Epson flatbed and a
Minolta film scanner and have been quite pleased. The slide scan quality
and ease of use is comparible while as I stated above, I really can't
address the speed issue for larger batches.
"il barbi" <angeieri.barboggi@ngi.it> wrote:
> I'm considering buying this scanner (a flatbed scanner with slide
> adapter) .........
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Re: "As CSM1 said, you need a dedicated slide scanner to get the best
results. No flatbed will give the the same results as a slide scanner>
will."
I am a huge fan of the Nikon scanners and I service and sell some models
of them. And I totally agree, in general, with the sentiment stated
above. But, that said, I will allow for this exception: Some models of
Epson flatbed scanners are essentially equal in quality to the Nikon
film scanners (and they have "Digital ICE", also). There are no other
flatbed scanners that I would say that about (and it doesn't even apply
to all Epson models), but I think that the exception should be noted.
Talker wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:00:40 +0200, "il barbi"
> <angeieri.barboggi@ngi.it> wrote:
>
>> I'm considering buying this scanner (a flatbed scanner with slide adapter)
>> but I don't find in the characteristics how much time it takes to scan a
>> slide/film (I suspect much...)
>> Next I'd like to hear some experience - I had a negative experience some
>> years ago with Epson Perfection 2400 photo (a flatbed scanner with slide
>> adapter too) because it lost details in the shadows. Now I agree dedicated
>> scanners like Nikon's LSx000 are better, but the price is very high compared
>> to this one (ranging from 168 to 220 euros)
>> TIA
>> il barbi
>>
>
> As CSM1 said, you need a dedicated slide scanner to get the best
> results. No flatbed will give the the same results as a slide scanner
> will.
> I have a Canon 9950F flatbed which will scan slides and it does
> okay, but I have a Polaroid SprintScan 4000 for slides. The
> SprintScan was a low priced slide scanner, and it is nowhere as good
> as the Nikon scanners, but it still does a better job with slides than
> my Canon does.
>
> Talker
"Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:h2davq$ue5$1@news.motzarella.org...
>cut<
> above. But, that said, I will allow for this exception: Some models of
> Epson flatbed scanners are essentially equal in quality to the Nikon film
> scanners (and they have "Digital ICE", also)
>
what models? how much time?
il barbi
> Re: "As CSM1 said, you need a dedicated slide scanner to get the best
> results. No flatbed will give the the same results as a slide scanner>
> will."
>
> I am a huge fan of the Nikon scanners and I service and sell some models
> of them. And I totally agree, in general, with the sentiment stated
> above. But, that said, I will allow for this exception: Some models of
> Epson flatbed scanners are essentially equal in quality to the Nikon
> film scanners (and they have "Digital ICE", also). There are no other
> flatbed scanners that I would say that about (and it doesn't even apply
> to all Epson models), but I think that the exception should be noted.
Some Canon scanners also have a Digital ICE type infrared scratch removal
system - Canon call theirs FARE (Film Auto Retouching Engine).
I have used my 8800 for slides and, as has been said, the quality is good,
but soft. The slide adaptor allows you to do 4 slides in one hit, and takes
approximately 2 mins per slide, depending on the DPI setting. It is very
quick with prints. I've also done B&W film negatives and they are a bit
quicker than slides.
HTH
--
Paul at preeve dot plus dot com
"il barbi" <angeieri.barboggi@ngi.it> wrote in message
news:h2j0in$j3m$1@nnrp.ngi.it...
> "Barry Watzman" <WatzmanNOSPAM@neo.rr.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:h2davq$ue5$1@news.motzarella.org...
>>cut<
>> above. But, that said, I will allow for this exception: Some models of
>> Epson flatbed scanners are essentially equal in quality to the Nikon film
>> scanners (and they have "Digital ICE", also)
>>
> what models? how much time?
> il barbi
>
Canoscan 8800F 
Linear Mode
