I just noticed today (and I have no idea how long it has been there)
that Polaroid UK is advertising a major price reduction on the SS4000
to 599 pounds. I have no idea if that is pre or post VAT, but it seems
cheaper than the price you found, which seems to imply the price
reduction is recent.
Just out of interest how does the UK pound compare to the US $ these days?
Art
chris@street56.fsbusiness.co.uk wrote:
> MegaPixels sells the Microtek Artixscan 4000TF (=Polaroid SS4000 plus)
> in UK for £799 inc. vat/ £680 ex vat.
>
>
>
> Chris Street
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
>>[mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Philip Elkin
>>Sent: 22 April 2002 23:12
>>To: chris@street56.fsbusiness.co.uk
>>Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Microtek vs Polaroid (was SS4000 Plus not
>>to Europe!)
>>
>>May I ask what price you have found for the 4000tf in the UK
>>
>>regards
>>
>>Philip
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: <al@greenspace.freeserve.co.uk>
>>To: <philip.elkin@virgin.net>
>>Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 9:51 PM
>>Subject: [filmscanners] Microtek vs Polaroid (was SS4000 Plus not to
>>Europe!)
>>
>>
>>Philip Elkin wrote (of the Polaroid Sprintscan SS4000 Plus)
>>
>>
>>>I tried to get one here in England but with no joy.
>>>
>>so Robert Michael suggested
>>
>>
>>>Or go for the Microtek articscan 4000tf which will come to Europe
>>>
>>and is
>>
>>>essentially the same thing
>>>
>>>From the web page (and checking some UK dealers) the price for the
>>Microtek
>>looks quite good.
>>But I know in the past Polaroid have always stressed that the SS4000
>>was
>>"tweaked" in some way
>>(firmware? stricter QC?) to make it perform better than the Microtek
>>4000t.
>>I assume they would
>>claim the same for the SS4000Plus against the 4000tf. (Although the
>>latter
>>does come with its
>>very own dust cover!)
>>
>>Has anyone had any direct experience of both the SS4000 and 4000t?
>>Obviously, there will be
>>some differences between Polacolor Insight and the Microtek software
>>but is
>>there a real
>>difference between them when using, say, Vuescan or Silverfast?
>>
>>I notice that the Microtek 4000tf has multisampling. I wonder if
>>this is
>>simply to match the facilities
>>offered with other scanners like the Nikon LS-4000 or whether it
>>actually
>>needs it?
>>
>>My interest in all of this is that my recently purchased SS4000 will
>>have to
>>go back: when I move it
>>and reconnect it (it's too big to live permanently on my desk), it
>>gives a
>>CCD error message and
>>stops at the calibration stage. At the next attempt, it previews but
>>the
>>preview image is solarised
>>and streaked. Next go, just the streaks remain. Finally, at the
>>fourth
>>attempt, the preview looks
>>fine. (The same preview corruption happens if I use Silverfast
>>instead.) It
>>then remains fine until
>>the scanner is moved again and the same thing happens.
>>
>>In addition, I've had the scanner get stuck in the calibration cycle
>>and
>>make a noise like it's going
>>to self-destruct so I've had to switch off. Also I've had it
>>completely
>>crash the PC a couple of times
>>as well as treating the slide holder as a negative holder or just not
>>recognising it properly!
>>
>>All in all, this particular unit doesn't inspire confidence -
>>especially
>>it's apparent need to bed in after
>>being moved. As this was the last one available, I'll be getting a
>>refund.
>>So the hunt for a scanner
>>continues.....
>>
>>I did like the SS4000, in particular the resolution and lack of
>>noise, but
>>it didn't really do very well
>>with the shadow detail in some of my dense slides. The extra dynamic
>>range
>>of the of the 4000tf
>>could certainly make it a candidate unless anyone has any horror
>>stories
>>about its predecessor.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Al Bond
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
