Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Fernando, If you buy a scanner to provide yourself with the ability to print, even on consumer grade inkjet printers, you will have to invest the equivalent of a 21mm f2.8 asph on the scanner side :-( The cheaper scanners show a constant inability to properly scan dark areas of a slide or to properly scan slightly underexposed slides. Which in turn will provide you with low quality files that will not give good prints. Those low-end scanners will be OK for average quality Web publishing or acceptable inkjet prints of evenly lit slides/negs. The current scanner recommendations are usually the top model of the Polaroid Sprintscan 35 range (do not have the ref at hand) and the Nikon Coolscan LS-2000. My experience is with the Sprintscan at work and the CanoScan 2700F at home. The Polaroid is MUCH better. Judging on specs, the Minolta Dimage should be in the same (low and frustrating) league as the Canon. I would conclude by stating that if you have gone the Leica way to get top notch optical quality, you will have to invest in proper scanning/printing gear and software to do justice to your lens investment... A good traditional commercial lab is still the way to go for good colour prints. And a top quality home b/w lab is much less expensive than the consumer digital chain. Alan. Fernando Moreno wrote: > ...<snip>.... I've heard the > Nikon Coolscans are better, but I prefer to save my money for M lenses! :) > , if quality is enough.