Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/12/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Mark's scathing assessment aside, I love both my LS-4000 and LS-8000. The LS-4000, especially with the roll feed attachment, makes scanning a full roll of film so easy that you may sell your M8 (or whatever digital gear you may have) :-) The LS-8000 is much larger, and much nosier. It sounds like a small jackhammer humming. I would imagine that the experience with LS-5000 and LS-9000 would be similar, just mo' better results, I guess. For the record, the largest print I ever made is a 24" x 64" panoramic, scanned using the LS-8000 and it looks quite nice even when you stick your nose at it. On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Diffraction Photography <diffraction.ca@ gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm new to this list and don't mean to hijack this thread but it seems > relevant to my current dilemma. I'm considering the Nikon 5000ED and the > 9000ED. I shoot mostly 35mm but I also shoot 120 film so one would think > the choice would be simple. I've read a lot of reviews and comparisons and > I have asked many opinions but I'm still stuck as I would only like to > purchase 1 scanner, not 2. Ultimately I am wondering about the experiences > of people here with the inconveniences, quality and effienciency of > scanning > 35mm film w/ the 9000ED vs using the 5000ED. I don't plan on buying the > multi-roll feeder. > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- // richard m: richard @imagecraft.com // b: http://rfman.wordpress.com