In comparing the Imacon (don't know model #), the Nikon 9000 and Epson
3200 the larger formats from 6x6 on up obtain good to excellent results
w/the Epson. As I understand, but have not tested, the 4870 is a
substantive step up in quality. Some have reported the 4870 gives its
best results however at 3200 dpi.
If one works with 35mm . . . . the Imacon is really good: excellent
sharpness, good D-Max w/nice shadow detail. The Nikon 9000 is also
very good but you can note a slight (but noticeable) difference in
quality between the Imacon & Nikon.
I have done a fair amount of scanning w/my personal Epson 3200 of 35mm
negatives of 1600 ISO color (Fuji) and compared those to the Imacon,
Nikon and Hell (fr Israel) units. The latter is a drum scan and is
state-of-the-art perfect. Next was Imacon but in dense negatives or
slides exhibit streaking. Nikon suffices for most blow-ups to 24 x 36.
The Epson 3200 is frankly wonderful for one who wishes economy. One can
purchase it on-line, @ the Epson site, refurbished for about $300.
However, it is most helpful if you spend the extra money to purchase
the Professional LaserSoft software for best quality of your scan.
Through a couple of post-scan sharpening methods I achieve more than
presentable 24" x 36" prints.
Best
Jack Fulton
On Sep 26, 2004, at 4:46 PM, Etienne Garbaux wrote:
It appears to be the prevailing view that the new-ish Epson 4870 is the
best scanner available for digitizing transparent originals up to 6x8"
[B&W
negatives, color negatives, color transparencies, duratrans, etc.].
What
do people like for transparent originals up to 8x10"? (One quite
important
specification to me is Dmax -- having shot for various alt processes for
many years, I have lots of "bulletproof" B&W negatives with highlight
densities exceeding 3.0.)
Best regards,
etienne
Received on Mon Sep 27 09:40:02 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 10/01/04-09:17:56 AM Z CST