kiev4a
Well-known
JoeFriday said:
I have the Canon 9950F and didn't find out until I got it home that it only does firewire with the Mac--not a PC. Still, I like the result I'm getting with it.
starting my quest for a slide scanner
- Thread starter JoeFriday
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 35
- Views 2K
I have the Canon 9950F and didn't find out until I got it home that it only does firewire with the Mac--not a PC. Still, I like the result I'm getting with it.
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
Mmm...I love being a Mac user. 😀
kiev4a
Well-known
Stephanie Brim said:
If you don't mind buying new software every time they introduce a new maching up change the OS it's great. Used a Mac at work for a long time but finally shifted to PC because of the constant changes and the expense. Mac would be dead now if it wasn't for the IPOD
doubs43
Well-known
Joe, here's a slide that I took on AgfaChrome more than 20 years ago when I was in England. I scanned it at 2400 dpi on my Epson 4180 and reduced it to 100 dpi. It's something to compare.
Walker
Walker
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
ok, now that I'm back home from an emergency my dad was having with Windows XP.. had to reinstall all the printers/scanner/etc.. funny how I never have to do anything like that with my Mac 😉
very nice scan, Walker.. at this point I'm pretty sure I'll order an Epson 4990 flatbed.. totally not what I was originally planning, but I can scan just about anything on it.. and if I want to get a better scan from film or slides, my brother has a dedicated slide scanner.. this way we'll have all the bases covered (especially MF)
very nice scan, Walker.. at this point I'm pretty sure I'll order an Epson 4990 flatbed.. totally not what I was originally planning, but I can scan just about anything on it.. and if I want to get a better scan from film or slides, my brother has a dedicated slide scanner.. this way we'll have all the bases covered (especially MF)
doubs43
Well-known
JoeFriday said:
Joe, that sounds like a good choice and still well below your maximum limit. I see some more GAS in your future! 😀
Walker
S
Scarpia
Guest
I have the Dual Scan IV and 9950 F and am satisfied with both. The 9950 F is an excellent scanner but the software bundle that comes with it is on the thin side. This is how I came to buy the 9950 F. I have a 40 something year old Rollei Magic with a Xenar f 3.5 80 mm lens. The focusing lens is completely out of kilter and the shutter only works at 1/500th of a second due to some damage many years ago. I hadn't used it in about 40 years. I decided to take some pictures using the 4.5 x 6 mask (an advantage in that is really dual format) of some scenes of Warrensburg from the same locations of some historic shots taken ca. 1890. I was under the impression that the taking lens could be used with good results using scale focusing. Having taken the shots I wanted, I shot shot the remaining frame, a street with beautiful large trees on both sides. I had the film (Fuji Reala 100) developed and printed by Kodak Perfect Touch. I noticed that at the left hand side of the last shot there was a small billboard that I would have eliminated had I noticed it when taking the shot. On the print from Kodak I could not read the billboard. Checking the negative the billboard was legible. Perfect Touch my a**. In a huff I went out and bought the 9950 F. It was easy to set up and I scanned the aforementioned negative at the maximum resolution of 4800 ppi. On my computer screen the billboard was perfectly legible, an advert for some local acreage. Glossy paper should yield a clearer image than a computer screen. I recommend the 9950 F for MF, I haven't tried it with 35mm although I have heard that is is OK. I read somewhere that it was equally good at 3200 ppi and that the much cheaper CanoScan 8200 was just as good scanning film at its limit of 3200 ppi.
Good luck with whatever you buy.
Kurt M.
Good luck with whatever you buy.
Kurt M.
djon
Well-known
I briefly owned two (in a row) 5400II Minoltas. The initial one actually worked for a few scans.
The only positive thing I can say is that mine really did produce 4 fine scans before it failed totally...with Ice each scan took approx 2.5 minutes. I don't recall but that was probably maximum fine, nominal 5400ppi. My Nikon V produced equally good scans from the same film at 4000ppi, printed to 11"...one online test reported Minolta's 5400ppi resolved identically to Nikon's 4000ppi.
Speaking purely dispassionately and technically, the Minolta is stinking trash (look inside...ecch) and I'd never buy anything with the Konica or Minolta brand on it again. My Nikon V is a Nikon...it works exactly the way you'd want.
The only positive thing I can say is that mine really did produce 4 fine scans before it failed totally...with Ice each scan took approx 2.5 minutes. I don't recall but that was probably maximum fine, nominal 5400ppi. My Nikon V produced equally good scans from the same film at 4000ppi, printed to 11"...one online test reported Minolta's 5400ppi resolved identically to Nikon's 4000ppi.
Speaking purely dispassionately and technically, the Minolta is stinking trash (look inside...ecch) and I'd never buy anything with the Konica or Minolta brand on it again. My Nikon V is a Nikon...it works exactly the way you'd want.
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
having read many reviews online, I've come to that same general conclusion.. looks like there will be a Nikon scanner being delivered to Sheboygan in the near future
djon
Well-known
Incidentally, I've never heard it said that Firewire was superior to USB2. Certainly USB 2 is very fast and troublefree.
Note that G5 is reportedly having trouble with CS2, some scanners, and some printers. This is reportedly the reason Mac is going to Intel chips, not counting on its patches. I gather G4 is reliable by comparison. < schadenfreude from a PC user 😎
Note that G5 is reportedly having trouble with CS2, some scanners, and some printers. This is reportedly the reason Mac is going to Intel chips, not counting on its patches. I gather G4 is reliable by comparison. < schadenfreude from a PC user 😎
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
JoeFriday said:
I've been very happy with my Minolta (now Konica-Minolta) Scan Elite II - I've lusted after a Nikon 8000/9000 series but I haven't been shooting much MF as of late; and.... I've been lucky enough to rent/use the Imacon 828 Flextight scanner and now, I've been spoiled... I can't go back.. I WON'T go back 😉
Cheers
Dave
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
considering it takes about the same amount of time for firewire to transfer all my songs to my iPod (20gb) as it takes my USB reader to transfer 512mb of digital photos.. yeah, firewire is MUCH faster
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
JoeFriday said:
http://www.usb-ware.com/firewire-vs-usb.htm
Comparison shows that FireWire is faster than USB 2.0 (FireWire 800 is even "more faster" - nice English huh.. - than USB 2.0)
Cheers
Dave
Kara
Fighting Yashica-tosis
I just thought I would throw this into the mix.
Food for thought
edit: sorry I missed the osx part of the post, Ill go to bed now.
Food for thought
edit: sorry I missed the osx part of the post, Ill go to bed now.
Last edited:
pmu
Well-known
JoeFriday said:
Stay away from this one! If it works perfectly it produces very good results, but 90% of the time it makes nasty stripes to the images. Minoltas own software is totally useless --- you would need to buy Vuescan software too. The scanner is everything but rugged in every possible way - I had my scanner repaired only about 2 weeks after I bought it (new) and the meachanism that moves the filmholder has giving me trouble all the time I've had that...It freezess and makes a helluva noise and the only thing that helps in that situation is to take the powersupply cord off. And day before warranty expired - it freezed totally, nothing works! Luckily I did manage to get it to the dealer in time and it will be reapaired within warranty.
My next scanner will be a Nikon film scanner or some "better" flatbed. No Konica Minolta for me anymore.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
The only dedicated film scanner that I have experience with is the original Minolta 5400 and the only drawback is the long scan times with ICE etc on. As has been said before, if you go for one of these high rez scanners be sure your PC is up to it. You will be creating 16 bit colour file sizes in the 220 MB area. Seems lots of RAM is important to keep things moving along.
Bob
Bob
