On Sep 7, 2006, at 12:37 AM, Toralf Lund wrote: >> I've had a Minolta Scan Dual II since 2000. It's getting a little >> long in the tooth and is a little lightly built for ultimate >> durability, so I nabbed a used Nikon Coolscan IV ED that I saw >> available for $300, which seems about average for them on the auction >> block. The V model would be better for its higher resolution, but >> I've never had any problem with the 3000ppi class scanner results, >> and the Coolscan IV is one of the best made scanners out there, ever. >> I don't use the scanner enough to pay $500 for it. >> > Which one of these scanners do you reckon is best at scanning B&W?
They're almost identical in use. The Minolta is 2820 ppi, the Nikon is 2900 ppi so the resolution is very near identical. I drive them both with Vuescan, turn off the dust and scratch removal stuff on the Nikon. What I haven't resolved yet (I've only had the Nikon for a few days) is which light source does a better job, but my preliminary results looking at color slide scans is that they look to produce nearly identical results. The Nikon seems marginally faster. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
