mike_r.1

I've struggled with my 5400 too. The 'reverse wind, cut, sleeve, book on top' thing is my method too. Also, try not to leave the holder in the scanner any longer than necessary...I've found the heat tends to cause a bit of curl on the individual frames.

The Windows XP driver works with Vista 32-bit. (for me, anyway)

I can't help you with the hardware problem but I can answer your question re: the Epson 4990. The detail level is just not there compared to the 5400; but the image quality is quite high (contrast & colors etc). Also, I find DOF to be a real issue with the Epson; more so than with the 5400.

Scanning film is drudgery, plain & simple. Avoiding this is reason enough buy a DSLR. Also, note that the D200 metering and flash systems are mostly superior to that of an F5. That's my experience, anyway. Oh...and the prints from a D200 will blow you away.

I wonder the same thing myself since I find I get better quality files with my Nikon D200 than with my Rollei 6003 Pro scanned on an Epson 4990. Someday I'll own a better film scanner; and may get better scans from my film but I look at that Rollei on the shelf every day and wonder if it's worth keeping at all.

IMHO, the Intuos2 is the best of the bunch (I have the 4x5). I recently tried an Intuos 3 4x5 and brought it back. The Graphire 3's are OK if you are on a budget; perhaps the Graphire 4 is great but I haven't tried it. At work I use a 9x12 and 6x8 Intuos 2 but prefer the puny 4x5 I have at home. It's perfect in every way.

 

But to answer your actual question, the Intuos 2 has better sensitivity and is built quite a bit more solidly. Graphire feels cheap to me; the ones I tried, anyway.

It's a great camera. I bought mine used, and it came with the grip; but they are quite readily available. You are correct about the lack of multi-spot metering (but there is a multi-pattern setting available that is reasonably accurate).

 

Whether it's worth it or not depends on the price. Around $1000 US sounds reasonable but $2K would be too much, IMHO.

What's interesting about the Kodak announcement is the bit about the packaging. I suspect they'll stop manufacturing film in USA and move all of that to China. Gone will be the 'Made in USA for North America' marketing thing; it'll all come from China. Maybe they'll pass the savings along to customers. Here in Canada it's hard to find a roll of E-series chrome for less than $15 unless you want to buy a brick. (Fujichrome is about the same price too). Ordering from Adorama is fine but you have to plan ahead.

 

I was a die-hard film guy up until my D200 purchase last month. Film-lovers may not think much of Scott Eaton's pointy posts but they are very, very full of truth.

 

Now I'm wondering if I should be keeping my F4, F5 & Rolleiflex 6003...maybe I'll sell the lot and go lens shopping.

I'm an electronics tech. Just to clarify Robert's response, because he is correct. You should have ALL of the caps changed in the power pack. Of course, they should be replaced with a suitably rated replacement part. With most electronic devices, the capacitors are the weakest part. If you can get to them and change them before other parts blow, you will effectively renew the equipment.

I compared the D50 & D70s recently. We have a D70 at work, so I'm quite familiar with it. I ended up with a D200, but my 2nd choice was the D50 because of what seemed to be better high ISO performance and slightly better overall in-camera processing. The SD memory was an issue, as was the lack of 2nd command dial and lack of wired release port. I was going to try one out for a weekend but decided on the D200 (which I only waited 5 days for).

 

Can't speak for the Canon kit lens, but the Nikon kit lens (AFS 18-70) never really impressed me image-quality wise; although, on our work camera (not photography related), it did the job nicely.

When I first got my 5400 (over 2 years ago) I stopped having my slides mounted and requested they be left uncut. I get them back rolled around a film can inside a long, protective sleeve. I cut them in strips of 6, sleeve them in archival pages, and let them flatten (under a book sometimes). Then I use the 6-frame holder to scan them. I have excellent corner-to-corner sharpness. I use Silverfast and manual-focus; usually close to the center of the frame.

 

Mounted slides are more of a problem for me; but I use MF and usually get most of the frame acceptably sharp. I don't know if this matters but I avoid the first slot of the holder (the one with the open end).

I have a 4990. ICE for prints is OK sometimes, but other times it's worse than not using it at all. Definitely not as useful as ICE with film. I can't say much more because I never really took the time to test it properly. I think it's more of a marketing gimmick than anything else.

I have the same monitor and no problems. Set the Dell profile in the color management tab of the display properties only. In the Nikon apps your "Default RGB Color Space" should be the profile you want to work in (in my case, NKADOBE.ICM).

You could place that yucky stuff right on the scanner's glass, and put piece of glass over top to keep it flat. Or, you could mount it in a Gepe anti-newton glass slide mount (but you'll have to cut the strips). I did the latter with my Minolta 5400, and the results were about what you'd expect from 1980-vintage 400ASA 110 film.

Why not just use Firefox with the 'Adblock' extension so you never have to look at that garbage ever again; regardless of wheter or not a site operator needs the ad income.

I ordered up one of the Adorama Flashpoint 1220 kits; and added a softbox and beauty dish. I just wanted to check them out because they seemed like a good deal and I'd read a positive review in Shutterbug. I'm acutally very impressed with it...it's well built, the controls are very friendly and it works great! I'm not that easy to impress but it seems like a great deal. Mine is very consistent ...I've confirmed that with a Sekonic L358.

 

I plan on getting a few more units this year.

I like the look of rocks with Velvia 50; haven't yet tried the other flavors of Velvia. Kodak's E100VS, for me, would be the #2 choice. I've only tried Provia a few times, and I found it too cool for my taste. Astia 100F gives a neutral look, if that's what you'd prefer.

I've done it. The hardest part is getting those little plastic screw covers off. Forget about not damaging them. The rest is pretty straightforward; the scanner comes apart pretty much like the PDF that Doug is referring to. You have to watch the transport lock because it will try to lift the scanner head (then it will drop back into the scanner...not good). Make sure the head is disengaged from the lock.

 

You then lift the back end of the scanner until the the catches at the front let go. Lift the whole assy an inch or two, and disconnect the power switch connector (mini, white).

 

Clean glass and reverse the procedure...voila!

 

Recommend Monster Clean fluid with a KimWipe...NOT the Monster cloth...it left bits on my glass when I tried it.

That's a lot of haze; but my 4990 hazed up after about 3 or 4 months. It's trivial to clean it, and there is a PDF with some good directions. Use Monster Clean fluid and a KIMWipe to clean it, if you do decide to try.

I think it gives better results than you would expect for the money. I find that a print of a 6x6 scanned on my 4990 has more detail than a 35mm scan on my Minolta 5400 (same film, subject etc; but by no means scientific)

 

You have to apply a considerable amount of sharpening to bring out the detail, but it is indeed there.

 

There is a bit of black art too (as with most other scanners) in terms of positioning of film etc.

 

Just buy one from a store where you may return it if you don't like it.

 

Here's a detail sample of a scan of some E100VS, 6x6, scanned at 3200 DPI.<div></div>

35mm on my Minolta 5400 does not look as good as 6x6 scanned on Epson 4990. 8x10; printed on Epson R200. Considering your far superior (to mine) MF scanner, you should get better prints with MF than 35mm with the same film, exposure, skill etc.

 

Not everyone can actually see the difference; which is why people say they can do 16x20 with 3MP digicams.

Digital is far better IMHO. Everything will be sharper since the PC may control each pixel individually when using the DVI (Digital) connection.

 

Your video card must have a DVI output for it to work.

Is the connector on the end of the scanner lid properly seated into the socket on the scanner base?

I can tell you first hand that the Metz bracket is useless with a Rollei 600x camera. I have a 6003 Pro with the Rollei hand grip and the Metz 45-CL4 flash. I use the Rollei SCA module; so you'll notice that this thing sticks out quite a bit from the camera. This forces you to mount the Metz bracket so that the flashgun itself is far from the camera body towards the left. I found I wasn't happy with the big shadows in my pictures so I just made my own bracket that keeps the flash above the lens.

 

Be prepared to find a solution to this if you go for a Metz handle flash.

 

Other than the mechanical problem, I am thrilled with my Metz flash...it works beautifully in TTL mode with my Rollei. Perfect exposures every time.

 

Mike.

The Dell 2001FP is fantastic. I also set up a BenQ 19" (937 I think was the model) for a co-worker...very nice too. I think most LCD's today have fast response times & viewing angles and can be calibrated.