EPSON 4870 PRO versus Microtek i900 (Was Re: modifying scanner)

I know that Dick Sullivan in a post about a month ago
(time esapes me) sang the praises of the i900 and said
that it was a better selection than the Epson.

Has anybody worked with the Mircotek besides Dick? The
Epson has better optical resolution (4800 according to
the Epson web page).

The list price for both scanners is $600 but both
Amazon and Buy.com have better prices (around $540).

My budget is tight - might be able to do $600 but not
sure what to do.

Any comments.

Sign me,
In Search of a better scanner (aka Stuart)

--- Tom Ferguson <tomf2468@pipeline.com> wrote:

> I'm doing some checking into this. My current
> scanner is an older Umax
> Powerlook III. A shocking $1200US at the time I
> bought it! Very nice
> scanner, does everything I need (including large
> film) and has a good
> density range. It is SCSI. I'm about to replace the
> last (old) Mac
> laptop I have that still runs SCSI :-(
>
> I'm trying a SCSI to USB adapter today, but I
> question if that will
> work.
>
> Anyway..... the best looking "new" option I found
> was the MicroTek
> i900. It isn't a "cheap" scanner (about $600US), but
> it has an optical
> resolution of 3200 (6400x3200) and "spec" of 4.2 for
> density (nice).
> Perhaps most importantly for large film, it has a
> dual path. Reflective
> stuff (prints) go above the bed's glass (as is
> normal). For film (35mm
> up to 8x10) the lens/CCD adjusts and the film goes
> INSIDE the scanner.
> The holder for everything up to (and including) 4x5
> are glassless. No
> more newton rings!!!!!!!! The 8x0 holder is a glass
> holder, but
> hopefully would be tighter than the "some areas of
> the film sag enough
> to make rings on large film" desktop scanning we are
> all use to :-(
>
> I haven't actually used this scanner, I'm just
> investigating it in case
> I have to replace my old one. "Potentially" this
> system could have
> focus problems?? The scanner comes in two versions
> "Silver" and "HDR".
> HDR has the full feature SilverFast software. See
> here:
> http://www.microtek.nl/
>
Product.php?Product=Detail&P_Id=107&Kword=i900&Select=All&FirstData=0
>
> I'm aware of cardbus and PCI adapter cards for SCSI.
> My desktop
> computer is "full" (no open PCI slots) and my new
> laptop is going to be
> a G4 iBook (no Cardbus), so my one left over SCSI
> device is going to be
> a problem :-(
>
> On Wednesday, November 17, 2004, at 07:44 AM,
> Michael Koch-Schulte
> wrote:
>
> > You could use the stitch function in Photoshop or
> an inexpensive
> > software like Panorama Factory to piece together
> the 8X10 neg from
> > multiple scans. Do it in two or three passes.
> Three might work better
> > as there is usually a little bit of light fall off
> at the edges. I
> > think the driver on the scanner may prohibit going
> any wider. I know
> > the 4870 can do an 8X10.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Dalyvoss@aol.com
> > To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 9:13 AM
> > Subject: modifying scanner
> >
> >  
> > My Epson Perfection scanner will scan a maximum
> negative size of 4x5. 
> > I'd like to be able to scan 8x10s with it.  The
> cover/light source for
> > the scanner will only illuminate a small area, so
> what i'm wondering
> > is this... has anyone fashioned a larger light
> source for a scanner
> > that covers the entire surface of the scanner
> bed?  Any thoughts?
> >  
> > thanks,
> > susan
> >  
> > Susan Daly Voss
> > lower upstate NY
> >
> >
> --------------
> Tom Ferguson
> http://www.ferguson-photo-design.com
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Wed Nov 17 12:57:17 2004