Hi Brian I haven't tried other scanners. Before I got it I had my negs scanned at a lab. They were no better than the onee I can make with my Epson.
However, the EPSON Perfection 3200 Photo is NOT a film scanner. It's a flatbed, which for reflective photographs is excellent. But I'm sure a modern dedicated film scanner will do a better job. I have seen negs scanned on a Minolta Dimage Dualscan II. They were actually worse than mine (it may have been causeed by poor film/poor development, though). But I'm sure the new Minolta scanner - "5700 something" can do a much better job. I got the Epson 3200 because I had a lot of negs - 35mm as well as 6x6 - that I wanted to scan. The Epson does 6x6 negs quite well - good enough for professional looking prints. But 35mm are just too small. If you want to scan 35mm negs, don't buy a flatbed scanner. Buy a film scanner - or perhaps a digital camera instead. Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Brian Walters [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 25. maj 2004 01:47 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Take a wild guess Hi Jens Well - eyerone else seems to think that the p4681284.html is the digital and who am I to disagree? The second photo doesn't seem to have the same amount of definition as the first which suggests it's been subject to more processing. Out of curiousity, what's your opinion of the Epson for scanning negatives and slides? Regards Brian +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Brian Walters Western Sydney, Australia On Mon, 24 May 2004 18:44 , 'Jens Bladt' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent: >I took the same photograph twice: >One of the photographs was shot with Pentax MZ-S and SMC FA 1.4/50mm on 200 >ASA Fuji Superia, scanned on EPSON PERFECTION 3200 PHOTO. The other was shot >with SONY DSC F717 at 200 ASA. > >Which one was made with a PENTAX? > >http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4681284.html >http://gallery46369.fotopic.net/p4681285.html > >Jens Bladt ---- Msg sent via Spymac Mail - http://www.spymac.com
