>From the internet reviews I have read the Canoscan 4000 is supposed to be
a very good unit.  I was torn between it and the Nikon several months ago
but went with the Nikon for its ability to add a roll film adaptrer and a
slide feeder.  But for the price and what I have seen in the reviews if
you do not need the ability to batch scan the Canon unit would be hard to
beat.

Whatever computer you get,  get one with a huge hard drive, and also get
a CDRW drive. Those digital images fill up a hard drive very quickly.

I am using an Old B&W Mac G3 350 with around 600 megs of ram on it.  am
soon to up grade it to a full gig of ram.  I know the newer boxes would
be faster, but honestly the only place where this setup seems slow is
decoding the RAW files from my D-30.  

Oh if you do get the Nikon 4000ED do yourself a HUGE favor and get
Vuescan for $40.  It cuts scan time to under two minutes on a 60 meg
scan, with the Nikon software it takes 5-6 minutes for each scan!

HTH.

-- 
Harrison McClary
Harrison McClary Photography
http://www.mcclary.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Once upon a time Mike Herkes wrote:

>Does anyone use any particular system configuration or equipment (how are 
>Canon scanners) that has suited them well for photo editing, scanning and 
>storage?

*
****
*******
***********************************************************
*  For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
*    http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************

Reply via email to