Jeroen Wenting
(K=25317) - Comment Date 9/3/2001
|
I don't know about that scanner, but budget scanners can be more trouble than they're worth.
The quality of the output is a lot lower, and they tend to break down more frequently.
Lower quality scans means more postprocessing to get a decent result, more breakdowns means more frustration and less time scanning.
|
|
|
|
Nanette Staph
(K=632) - Comment Date 9/4/2001
|
This is a very decent scanner for the price. Altaf (our usefilm editor) has this same scanner...and its the one I always suggest to others who want a decent scanner for the price. Be sure to get the film adapter that is sold separately (I believe). I've been very happy with the prints from these scans...up to 8X10 are really very good.
|
|
|
|
Teymoor Ghashghai
(K=45) - Comment Date 9/6/2001
|
A film scanner is of course the best way to get your images into the computer but on a budget, the Epson 1640 Photo is a very good value. Get the "Photo" version as it has the transparency adaptor built in. www.pricescan.com is a good place to start shopping for prices. If you can afford a bit more you might want to look at a Nikon Coolscan IV or perhaps a refurbished Nikon Super Coolscan (the LS-2000). I must say; avoid UMAX. The scanners are good enough but their service is pathetic at best.
|
|
|
|
