Re: filmscanners: evolution (was Nikon 8000 ED or Polaroid Sprintscan

[TonySleep@halftone.co.uk (Tony Sleep)]

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 08:34:31 -0700  Michael Moore (miguelmas@qwest.net) wrote:

>  BTW, I use a
> Nikon N90s, cost me $750 for the body new... uses the same glass as the 
F-5... It
> seems to me a camera is actually a more complex animal than a scanner, even a 
film
> scanner... 

Dunno. A camera is just a box with a hole on the front. Most of the addons 
apart from a viewfinder and shutter are voluntary complexity which *can* be 
enormously helpful or otherwise (there are times I hate my EOSin's:). You'd be 
pushed to see much if any improvement in ultimate image quality between a 1961 
Pentax SV and your N90's both with standard lenses.

> when enough fotogs start to figure out they are going to have to scan or
> die, the market will get really competitive for their dollar, just like the 
pro
> camera market is...

I think we just arrived about there.

Regards 

Tony Sleep
http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & 
comparisons