rscheffler wrote:
Heinz - thanks for those comparisons and the reminder of a reason I\'ll be sticking with digital - scanning seems vey time consuming. Though I do have hundreds of negative and slide sheets I want to eventually revisit and selectively scan.
I think it was Luka who stated something along the lines that scanning technology should have improved in the last 10 years. My impression is that it has stagnated. Maybe it has improved for flatbeds, but the selection of film dedicated scanners seems to have diminished greatly. I was thinking of buying a Nikon Coolscan V, but was disappointed to learn it along with most had been discontinued. In the end I\'ll probably get an Epson V750 or similar.
Actually it sounds like much more hassle than it really is, Joe. All this testing was time consuming, yes, but has brought me to a workflow (for the moment) that is quite straight forward and fast.
If have scanned a roll this afternoon whilst doing completely different things in the house. Just needed to go to the computer every 20 minutes and change the filmstripe and make the pre scans for a minute. The rest is an automatic process that does not need any attention. All in all I was on the PC for probably 15 minutes for the roll with 36 frames.
By the way, the roll came out much much better than the last examples, lens was the Nokton, it seems that this makes a huge difference to the old Elmar in terms of resolution.
