Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Totally off topic.... Polaroid scanner
From: Nick Roberts <nickbroberts@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 07:01:19 -0800 (PST)

Whoops! Sorry, AFAIK the only Polaroid-branded scanner
currently in the UK (and then not for long - it's due
to be replaced by the Microtek version) is the 120,
which is a fair bit dearer than the Multi Pro. Ted's
is only sold as a Microtek, but the price differential
is 2x, not 3x here - still significant, but it does
make the comparison a little more valid (sound of
desparate back peddling!).
The Multi Pro is currently the most affordable MF film
scanner (as opposed to flatbeds), but it's also a good
choice for 35mm, and the Nikon 4000 is only a third
cheaper - which were all factors in making my choice,
but probably is no help at all to Ted. Sorry, Ted.

Nick

 
- --- Gary Williams <nasmformyzombie@mindspring.com>
wrote:
> 
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Totally off topic.... Polaroid
> scanner
> 
> 
> > Ted,
> >
> > I've recently bought a Minolta Scan Multi Pro
> > (actually, the name's even longer, but that will
> do).
> > "Only" 3200 pixels per inch for 120, but 4800 ppi
> for
> > 35mm, and it produces real 16 bit scans with a
> higher
> > claimed dynamic range than the Nikon or Polaroid.
> So
> > far I'm very happy with it indeed.
> >
> > Nick
> 
> Isn't the Minolta almost 3x more money than the 
> Polaroid?  It should be
> dynamite.
> 
> Gary
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, see
http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://platinum.yahoo.com
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from "Gary Williams" <nasmformyzombie@mindspring.com> (Re: [Leica] Totally off topic.... Polaroid scanner)