RE: filmscanners: Minolta Multi Pro

["Wilson, Paul" <PWilson@gomez.com>]

Yes, we're talking about the Minolta Scan Multi Pro.  If you dig deep enough
you will find the optical resolution for MF which is 3200 dpi.  This should
explain the difference in CCD.  In any event, 3200dpi is plenty for a scan
of a 6x7 transparency and the scans are excellent. 

Paul Wilson

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Winsor Crosby [mailto:wincros@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 5:45 PM
> To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
> Subject: filmscanners: Minolta Multi Pro
> 
> 
> >Stylistically, I'd call the Minolta boring rather than ugly but it's 
> >made out of metal whereas the Polaroid is at least partially 
> >plastic.  The Minolta is also A LOT smaller and quieter than the 
> >Polaroid.  Neither effect scan quality but they do make living with 
> >the scanner easier.
> 
> 
> 
> We are talking about the Minolta Multi Pro here are we not? Why is it 
> being compared to Nikon and Polaroid. Is no one concerned that while 
> the Polaroid uses a very expensive 10K pixels per line CCD and gives 
> 4000 dpi for all formats, the Minolta claims 4800 dpi with a 7260 
> pixels per line CCD. How do they do that? Minolta also does not give 
> the optical resolution on their site for the 2 1/4 film format, but 
> gives 4800 dpi "interpolated".    On other scanners interpolated 
> resolution is 2 or 3 times the optical resolution. It is often said 
> that it is a false number and should be ignored.  What is the 
> Minolta's optical resolution on medium format?  Is it actually about 
> 2000 dpi? Why would one buy a  multi format scanner to get the same 
> size file regardless of format. I don't understand.
> -- 
> Winsor Crosby
> Long Beach, California
>