satgre@att.net
Date: 12/23/02-07:29:50 AM Z
Mike,
Your terse reply wasn't quite right. While the 2450 ($399 at the Epson site) has
a higher model number, its price is **less** than Katherine's 1680 ($800 or more
depending upon the model).
Epson considers the 2450 a personal scanner, while the 1680 is called a
professional unit. From what I was able to find out on Epson's site, the 1680
has a higher DMAX and can handle up 8 x10 slides/negatives (with an optional
adapter -- which is included with their 1680 Professional models).
Dontcha wish that the numbering sequence has some relationship to price? Maybe
Epson doesn't know that it's selling scanners in AMERIKA.
sG
PS Rumor on the internet that Epson is going to release a new scanner (3450)
some time in the new year.
PPS Also, isn't the 1280 printer a year or more old? It's quite possible that
they'll have a new printer available soon too (when I spoke to one of their
sales people, he told me that they like to release a new model every year,
though he couldn't say if they were maintaining their schedule). The 1280 may
become a clearance special - right now you can buy it for $500 or so, and get a
$100 rebate. Then again, with the economy so bad, they may be offering the
rebate just to spur sales. Oh to be a fly on the wall.
> Katherine. Lookit. The number is higher. The money was more. This is
> AMERIKA.
>
> What was your question?
>
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Katharine Thayer" <kthayer@pacifier.com>
> To: <alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
> Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 1:48 PM
> Subject: Re: oh dear
>
>
> My Epson 1680 actually scans 35mm film better than my Nikon LS-2000; I
> don't know the models so don't know how the 1680 compares to the 2450.
> kt
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 01/31/03-09:31:26 AM Z CST