Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/02/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]One way to look at the difference between Nikon and Polaroid/Microtek scanners is the same as comparing a condenser enlarger (Nikon LED) and cold-light head(Polaroid cold cathode fluorescent). I am not going to say which is better, I'm sure someone will jump in, they are just different. Other things to think about are how do you get the film into the scanner, what is its footprint and the length of time to get a scan. I printed with condenser enlargers for 30 years, I still use a Nikon LS-2000 and have explored both the above options and lean toward the Nikon. Happy snaps, Steven Alexander on 2/13/03 2:04 PM, Douglas Herr at telyt@earthlink.net wrote: > Ernest Nitka <enitka@twcny.rr.com> wrote: > A few of my slides were also scanned (by other people) with Coolscan IV and > Coolscan 4000 scanners. These were older Kodachromes that weren't completely > flat. The Nikon scanners could not get the entire slide in focus. The > Polaroid scanner can, > Doug Herr > Birdman of Sacramento > http://www.wildlightphoto.com > -- - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html