----- Original Message -----
From: bjs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Frank Paris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 12:37 PM
> Subject: RE: filmscanners: SS4000 and LS-2000 real value?
>
>
> > I have no problem with the slide holder. What possible difference would
it
> > make if it were made out of metal? The problem with the negative holder
> > isn't that it is made out of plastic. It's simply badly designed.
> >
> > Frank Paris
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumList?u=62684
> >
>
> True enough...I've seen people knock the Canon holder because it is
plastic
> and not metal. But I've sat on it, rolled over it with a chair and
> otherwise done horrible things to it without a problem.
>
> A metal version wouldn't have survived as well in fact.
>
> How it is designed is the important factor. Good plastic works as well or
> better than metal from a materials viewpoint.
>
> Byron
>
>
Plastic vs. metal isn't even the question for me. The Nikon needs NO film
holder. Not plastic. Not metal. You just feed the filmstrip in. I've just
finished scanning about a thousand frames on my LS-2000 without a hiccup.
Hassle free. My SS-4000 really slows me down. Time IS money.
Quick and easy. That's what matters!
Bob Kehl
