What a great pleasure to come across the Forum
on a late-evening stroll through the global
photography neighborhood! This is an amazing site.
The initial search was for scanner info, and there certainly
is that -- in the most concise presentation imaginable.
Hats off,
Blaine Dunlap
New Orleans
Blaine Dunlap
New Orleans
Originally Posted by blaine dunlap
Hi Blaine,
Welcome!
.
Leigh,
Thanks for the comparison... very interesting since I'm about to look for a new scanner soon!
Cheers
Life in the fast lane!
What's with the Heidleberg scans?
They look awful.
Are you 100% sure that a trained professional produced them???
Is it possible the equipment was defective?
J Michael Sullivan
Last edited by MJSfoto1956; 6-Jul-2006 at 04:59.
J Michael,
That's an issue about device comparison tests I've had for some time. Since all image capture devices NEVER produce a perfect image with one click most test rely on the default settings which never produce perfect results as well.
What they should test is the amount of time and effort it takes to get it perfect in post production and if a perfect result can even be achieved. That'll at least tell you how much the device pays for itself from a production stand point.
A note on the 'current' Microtek 2500, the 2500f. The software that drives the machine is more flexible than that of the 2500 and it does have higher resolution than the 1800f but its DMax may not be any better. The machine is still inproduction but is not available in North America. It is available in Europe and Asia. The scanning array in the 2500f is the same array used in most of the Creo scanners.
If Ken Lee is reading this perhaps he will chime in since he runs a 2500f.
Can you put some light on this subject please.
I have a new camera a 6x24 format with a 120 nikon lens which makes good e6 shoots when I do get it right.
It has been some time since I have shot a lot of medium format and it only been a month back into it.
However, I use a local photo which are using a canon scanner and the result are less than what I want, I am thinking about ether buying a
Drum scanner ICG 350i (someone offered me for 1250$NZD) or getting a Epson V700 M Pro wet mount.
My Question is what is the better way to go?
Drum or V700 and is there that mach diff?
Allan,
There is a huge amount of difference. First off, if you are going the less expensive route then consider the 4990 insted of the V700 as all our tests indicate that the 4990 does as well in all but the V700's highest setting and if you use that setting with a 6x24 trannie it will take a very long time and produce a file larger than mot computers can handle.
As for the ICG 350i at 1250$NZ it is such an extraordinaryly low price that it is a gift horse I would look carefully in the mouth. It would be well worth your while to 1) contact ICG in the UK and see what details they can give you on t he machine in terms of its age and service record (they are good about that) and further ask them what specific things you need to look for when evaluating the machine. Remember you are talking about a machine that is still servicable and has parts available. Current rebuilt cost from the factory for such a machine is ~ 20,000$NZ. Make sure that the seller us furnishing all the parts, including software and that everything is in good working order. Run a scan on the machine before you purchase if you can. Also, make sure the drum can handle a 24cm piece of film ( I don't recall its maximum capacity but 24cm should be fine). Next keep in mind that ANY replacement parts or refurbishment needed will cost you much mor ethan your initial purchase. If, after considering all that, it is still a go then finally think about the learning curve. The machine is capable of producing a scan that is much much better than any of the consumer scanners but only with a steep learning curve. One more thing, make sure you have space for it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks