Originally Posted by
interneg
It's nowhere near precise enough in construction - and the way it tries to squeeze resolution from the 1/2 pixel overlapping sensors & interpolating them together (not very well) will deliver a misleadingly high resolution (from an ultra high contrast chart) at very poor MTF. So, the 2200-2400ppi across the sensor is really only about 2x1200ppi + questionable interpolation. High MTF is critical to good scan results - and that overall transfer function is sensitive to both mechanical and optical components/ precision.
If it was built to much higher standards and used leadscrew rather than belt drive systems - and an optical path that is designed for high MTF over absolute resolution, then it might be a potentially good machine. The available length of linear scan sensors is why most of the high end flatbeds resorted to XY scanning & stitching.
Could a better machine be built? Unquestionably, yes. Could it be built for less than USD 10,000 selling price, I don't know - maybe if you could sell a lot of them & leverage newer manufacturing techniques. If it could deliver 1500ppi across the bed & 3-4000ppi down a narrower strip (6000ppi could probably be done, if the thing was well enough designed) at USB 3 speed, then it's potentially very good. Better yet if it automatically complies with how colour neg is supposed to be 'seen' by the paper and how colour transparency is supposed to be viewed (easily done with appropriate RGB LED and engineering). Autofocus and reliable focus calibration should not be difficult to implement either - if it's designed to quality, not price.
Bookmarks