Austin wrote:
>That VERY much depends on the film being scanned, what camera/lense and
>development were used. I find a VERY large difference in quality of 4000spi
>scans vs 2700spi scans. I find the 2700 scans are not very sharp, and
don't
>have near the detail the 4000spi scans do...and then 5080 is even far better
>than 4000. It also depends on what scanners you are talking about.
I was specifically talking about my Nikon LS30 and the Polaroid SS4000 at
work. The film FWIW was Fuji Provia 100F. I was specifically interested
in the ability of the SS4000 to get shadow detail, and it does get much
more than the LS30. Apart from shadow detail, the differences weren't
staggering.
I did *not* think that the SS4K scans were significantly sharper than the
Nikon. There was just more shadow detail.
However, rather than get into a disagreement about a scanner I don't own
(the SS4000), all I'm saying at this point is that my photos don't seem
to be sharp enough to get the most out of the LS30, let alone the SS4K.
I don't believe that the scanner is the limiting factor at the moment,
and that's why I'm looking at getting at least one better lens. I'm not
planning to buy a new scanner - I'd much rather spend the money on a new
lens!
Rob
Rob Geraghty harper@wordweb.com
