[filmscanners] RE: Epson Photo 2450

["Alessandro Pardi" <alessandro.pardi@inferentiadnm.com>]

Ian,

I admit I'm clueless about this one, so let's add it to my original
questions. By the way, I'm sure MF filmscanners are better, but they are
also about 10 times more expensive than the 2450, and I just can't afford
one (I'd rather spend the money on the 43mm for my new Mamiya 7). Given that
I'm starting with MF right now, and so I have no old stuff to scan, the
other obvious choice is to have my best negatives professionally scanned (I
don't shoot that much). We'll see...

Alex

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Jackson [mailto:Ian_Jackson@blueyonder.co.uk]
> Sent: venerdì 25 gennaio 2002 12.04
> To: alessandro.pardi@inferentiadnm.com
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Photo 2450
> 
> 
> Alessandro,
> 
> I thought that with a flatbed one had to find out whether the scanhead
> used 1 or 3 CCD so that you could decide if dividing the resolution by
> 3 was necessary to compare with any medium format film scanner?
> 
> This is one reason why I have been waiting for the Minolta Scan Multi
> Pro price to come down rather than go for the 2450.
> 
> Ian
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alessandro Pardi" <alessandro.pardi@inferentiadnm.com>
> To: <Ian_Jackson@blueyonder.co.uk>
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 10:44 AM
> Subject: [filmscanners] Epson Photo 2450
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm considering the (highly regarded) Epson Photo 2450 to scan 6x7
> negatives. I already got positive feedback about this scanner, but
> have a
> few more questions:
> 
> 1) Are there any grain aliasing problems? This was definitely an issue
> with
> my Nikon LS-30 (2700dpi), and no longer is with my current Canon FS
> 4000
> (4000dpi): given that the specs of the Epson are 2400x4800 dpi, I
> wonder
> which number is more relevant... For the record, I'll probably be
> scanning
> mostly Portra 400BW.
> 2) I'm probably dense, but this 2400x4800 dpi resolution makes me a
> bit
> uneasy. I understand that the micro-step technology allows for *very*
> small
> movements in one direction thus resulting in the higher figure, but
> I'm led
> to think that if I scan a 6x6 negative with 2400dpi on the x axis and
> 4800
> on the y axis I should get an image with a 1:2 ratio, rather than 1:1.
> Does
> this mean that the scanner *always* interpolates either up to 4800 dpi
> or
> down to 2400?
> 3) The 2450 is less than half the price of the 1680, which has less
> resolution (1600x3200 dpi), the same format (A4), and no other
> apparent big
> enhancement that could justify the cost. What am I missing here?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Alessandro Pardi
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
> filmscanners'
> or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message
> title or body
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 
> 'unsubscribe filmscanners'
> or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the 
> message title or body
> 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body