Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/04/29
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]That's what I've assumed in looking at the two (5000 vs. 9000)- no need for upgrade in the forseeable future (unlike my Microtek Artixscan 4000). I've also realized that, nothing that I do requires immediate output, so scanned c41 is fast enough for me. It also would allow me to postpone any decisions about digital SLR until the prices fall a little more <grin>. Allen >On 4/29/04 12:41 PM, "Allen Graves" <ahgraves@prodigy.net> wrote: > >> I've been looking at the Nikon Coolscan 9000 for this. It scans pano >> film with the rotating glass mount carrier, an option that adds ~$350 >> to the already substantial cost. Everything I've read makes the >> scanner sound wonderful, but it's in very short supply and MF doesn't >> come cheap. The Microtek is supposed to be a good scanner as well, >> but it seems technologically a little dated in comparison to the Nikon >> >> Decisions, decisions.... >> >> Allen >> >> >But I presumptuously think you'd not ever have to think about upgrading from >there. As a matter of fact I also think that about my 5000. Does it need to >be any better? I cant see why. As far as I go this is as good as it gets. > > >Mark Rabiner >Photography >Portland Oregon > > > >New-improved >http://rabinergroup.com/ > > > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information