Re: Re: Scanner

I have a Microteck 120TF and have not had the same problems. You must have gotten a lemon. Mine does very nice scans.

George
>
> From: Joe Smigiel <jsmigiel@kvcc.edu>
> Date: 2005/02/21 Mon AM 02:56:08 GMT
> To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
> Subject: Re: Scanner
>
> Rajul,
>
> I ordered a Nikon Coolscan 9000 back in August for the school where I'm
> employed. It was backordered and the delivery date kept getting pushed
> back so Calumet eventually recommended a Microtek Artscan model 120TF
> (at least I think that was the model) last December. The Microek had
> slightly better specs (slightly better dynamic range) than the Nikon but
> when I set it up last month, I found it to be extremely LOUD and by the
> 3rd or 4th scan, it had developed an artifact. Back it went and I
> reordered the Nikon. I had a previous model Nikon before and although
> it had a firmware problem we were able to resolve it. It was easier to
> use and much quiter.
>
> The 35mm carrier for the Microtek was also poorly engineered. You could
> not scan the entire first frame of the filmstrip.
>
> Maybe I just got a lemon Microtek, but I would not recommend it. Even
> before the artifact developed, I did not like the speed, noise, and
> carriers enough to contemplate returning it. There were also some icon
> software bugs running it with OS 10.2.x on a Powerbook G4.
>
> I'm still waiting for the Nikon to arrive. Apparently it is very
> popular.
>
> Joe
>
> >>> eyeear@telus.net 02/20/05 5:28 PM >>>
> I am looking to upgrade my scanner to one that is compatible with Mac
> G4 ( OS 10.3.).
> It should scan in 48-bit RGB mode and have adapters for 35 mm slides
> and film and for 6 x 7 cm film.
>
> Any suggestions would be appreciated. Rajul
>
>
>
Received on Mon Feb 21 14:39:40 2005