|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Jerry, This simply flies in the face of every (and I mean every) review ever reported with these scanners, which, if I were making such statements, would make me wonder if I wasn't making some major error in my testing. Don't you find it at least somewhat troubling that your conclusions (which were rather rushed, at that) are so contrary to those of all other users of both the SS4000 and the SS4000+ scanners? It seems to me that either you should be selling that FS2710 back to Canon so it can be studied for it's miraculous resolution properties, or your SS4000+, in spite of the Polaroid rep's response, (what country are you in, BTW) is defective, or you were misunderstanding the software you were using with it. Otherwise, I suggest all FS2710 owners should hold onto their scanners until something better comes along than the current 4000 dpi film scanners on the market, since the SS4000+ is equated in terms of scan quality to the Nikon 4000 (without the DOF issues) and better than the FS4000. So I'm not sure where that leaves you. Art Jerry Olson wrote: > Neal, I'm in exactly the same boat as you. I have the 2710 and it is > excellent for most things. I too, wanted a 4000 dpi scanner. > > I just tried the polaroid 4000+ and was very disappointed. It isn't as > sharp as my 2710. In fact, it is very noticeable less sharp. The > polaroid tech said to e mail him a sample, at 4000 dpi, (very small > area). He thought it was just fine, and perfectly acceptable. He has > obviously never seen a sharp scan. So I'm returning it, and will get the > Canon 4000. I hear that is a sharp scanner. (Can't afford the Nikon, at > twice the price). > > Also, the software that comes with polaroids scanner is fairly dismal. I > couldn't get a decent black and white scan with either Silverfast OR the > Polacolor insight software. The scans looked extremely dark in the pre > scan, and about 4 stops too light in photoshop. Silverfast must not be > designed for black and white photos, as all the tools were grayed out, > so you couldn't alter the scan in the prescan mode! > > > > Jerry > > >>Before you say 4000 dpi compared to 2900 dpi, I use my >>current scanner Canon FS2720, for scanning slides and >>making 4x6 prints and web or emailing. Occasionally >>maybe an 8x10, but really if I want a decent 8x10, I >>usually send it off to The Slideprinter in Denver. >>That said, I'm looking for which one of these will do >>the best with slides. I don't think they are even >>difficult slides, but my present scanner the Canon >>FS2720, just can't do an accurate job with a few of >>them. Will the Canon FS4000 significantly out perform >>the FS2720 or just produce more dpi. The Nikon has a >>different light source, will it produce significantly >>better results than the FS2720. Most comparisons I've >>seen deal mostly with cropping, and dpi, and ICE, but >>I'm really not interested in that as much as getting >>an accurate, sharp, scan from a slide. >> >>I've also tried multipass in Vuescan with little >>improvement. I think I'm getting alot out of the >>FS2720, it just isn't quite enough. >> >> - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.