Is this a good scan ?

<p>here it is</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you ,Les , Stuart !<br>

what about a <strong>Canon canoscan FS4000us</strong> ? It has 6 years, aprox 2000 scans , unused and boxed the last 3 years . He asks <strong>500</strong> E for it .<br>

What do you think about this offer?</p>

<p>Stuart, you are an MG fan? I don't know much about Epson scanners, is it scanning at a native 6400ppi or is it interpolating? I know even on an Imacon, if I set the scanning resolution to a "non-native" value the scan is noticeably degraded (blurred). </p>

<p>Teo, I wonder if the Minolta might be a good choice for you. I have no experience with it but I think there are many happy users. Search Pnet and you should find a lot of discussion.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My impression too is that , despite the dimensions of the file, the level of detail isn't at least on par with the 10MP files of my XTi, and even those of the G9 !!!<br>

....<br>

all in all , I am looking to buy a scanner, but I can't afford a Nikon</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hi Teo</p>

<p>May I be brutally honest here and suggest you give up on the 35mm scanning business? If you want to be able to scan 35mm film and get results above your XTi then you'll need to spend serious money and invest a lot of effort, far more than you can see now. For most people (myself included) the output from a digital SLR like an XTi is good enough to not justify the hassle that scanning 35mm film can be.</p>

<p>There's a reason why you can't find a scanner for your budget and film size. Academically, yes, there may be scanners that can pull out a few more megapixels from some 35mm films. Practically, it's just not worth doing any more these days.</p>

 

<p> I like classic cars, customs hot rods that kind of thing. My father builds street rods and when I left school I used to work as a panel beater. His is the blue 1934 Ford next to the green 1933 Plymouth. I was just there with my father not as a photographer but took some shots any way. The shoot was organised by a place that used to restore MGs but I believe the shoot was for the shipping company. I don't know if the shot was ever used.</p>

<p>As for the V500 epson the specs list it having 6400ppi optical resolution but it just a marketing number I believe. There is just no way it has that much resolution. The problem is that to get everying the epson has to offer it seems it is better to scan at 6400pp and down sample. I have done comparisons with that slide and at lower resolutions such as 3500 ppi the grill on the MG is not resolved as well. I don't think the V500 does a bad job considering its price. I would not ever expect it to be close to film scanner though. A bit of sharpening helps though. Here is a sharpened version.</p><div></div>

<blockquote>

<p>May I be brutally honest here and suggest you give up on the 35mm scanning business?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why, just because it doesn't suit some people? </p>

<p>The pros and cons of digicam and film imaging have been studied and debated to death. There is an enormous body of good quality data available for anybody who cares to research it. Perceived image quality is subjective and direct objective comparisons can be difficult but nevertheless most good quality data suggests that for the average veiwer the point of "equivalence" for colour imaging is around 15MP for 35mm, 50MP for medium format and 200MP for 4x5. Some films will do better than that, some worse. And obviously the camera and technique play a part. In the end it's a personal choice and everyone is free to make that choice for themselves. If you like the look and the process of digicam imaging then use a digicam. If you like the look and the process of film imaging then use film. Nothing more needs to be said. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>There's a reason why you can't find a scanner for your budget and film size.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, it's because production of some scanners has ceased and demand has driven up the price of used scanners. </p>

<p>Stuart, I agree, the Epson does a pretty reasonable job actually. </p>

<p>I'm an MG fan from way back, I've owned my '67 MGB for 35 years now and still enjoying it. Also rather fond of old bikes as you can see from the earlier picture. Nice to see that collection of MGs anyway.</p>

<p>Today I looked at one of these scanned files on a full HD tv 1080 as a monitor and it produced a 50cm x 35cm image that looked very good as it was , no crop applied. I was a file treated with Dfine in standard mode .<br /><strong>If</strong> these files can produce such big <strong>prints</strong> , seems ok for me, at least for the moment. Of course, there is very little space for cropping , so the composition and framing has to be done very carefully .</p>