Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > Misc Accessories

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 8, 2004, 3:20 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1
Default Film Scanners - New Nikons (new Canons?)

Does anyone know when the Nikon Coolscan V will be available? Any reviews on it?

Any news of Canon announcing a successor to the FS4000US?

B&H is not advertising any Canon or Nikon film scanners. Other web sales sites are advertising the Nikon Coolscan V "for shipment when received."

It is odd to have two majors with no product out.
DavidG is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 8, 2004, 3:48 PM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,545
Default

There's always Konica Minolta :lol:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2004, 3:39 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL
There's always Konica Minolta :lol:
I'm thinking of buying the Minilta 5400 as I want to make exhibition size scans fron neg and slide- will this scanner do the business for me? How long does it take to make a scan at the highest setting with ICE etc? What's the quality like? I currently have a Nikon Coolscan IV...

Thanks!

Finn :roll:
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 21, 2004, 8:57 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

A buddy of mine got a 5400 and he loves it. Excellent quality, but he says that at the highest rez he can go for a coffee while waiting He says he scans at the rez required for his destined output to speed things up.

Don't know if he is exagerating or not
Minolta should have some specs somewhere on scan times etc.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2004, 5:52 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterP
A buddy of mine got a 5400 and he loves it. Excellent quality, but he says that at the highest rez he can go for a coffee while waiting He says he scans at the rez required for his destined output to speed things up.

Don't know if he is exagerating or not
Minolta should have some specs somewhere on scan times etc.
Thanks very much for that! While I'm at it, I might as well throw one more question- does it make all that much difference whether I scan at 8 bit or 12? Photoshop doesn't seem to work with the 12 and you end up converting back to 8...Any thoughts on this?

Thanks again,

Finn, Dublin, Ireland. :shock: :?:
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2004, 10:49 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

The bits is the number of colors levels you get per channel.
The new Photoshop CS can do 16bit in almost all functions.

Scanning at 8bit you get 256 colors levels a channel, in 3 channels for a total of only 16,777,215 possible colors in the resulting 24bit image.

Scanning at 16bit you get 65,536 color levels a channel, much bigger files much bigger color space. .

I hope I remembered the numbers right, memory is going
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2004, 2:07 PM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,545
Default

PeterP

Your number are correct; However 16-bit do not give you a bigger colour space... but bigger file yes. To get a bigger colour space one has to map the scan to a larger gamut like AdobeRGB. 16-bit just give you more shade inside the same sRGB colour space... if that's what was done originally

The real question is can anyone see the difference?
... most folks can't tell between (255, 255, 255) vs (254, 255, 255), (ie 1-bit @ 8-bit) even with an instrument, let alone a (65534,65535,65535) value (ie 1-bit @ 16-bit), but a Pentium 4 sure can! :lol: :lol: :lol:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2004, 4:24 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL
PeterP

Your number are correct; However 16-bit do not give you a bigger colour space... but bigger file yes. To get a bigger colour space one has to map the scan to a larger gamut like AdobeRGB. 16-bit just give you more shade inside the same sRGB colour space... if that's what was done originally

The real question is can anyone see the difference?
... most folks can't tell between (255, 255, 255) vs (254, 255, 255), (ie 1-bit @ 8-bit) even with an instrument, let alone a (65534,65535,65535) value (ie 1-bit @ 16-bit), but a Pentium 4 sure can! :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote:

Thank you BOTH! It's great that there are experts out there so willing to sharde their information and knowledge.

Basically, do you think it's worth mu trading in my Nikon Coolscan IV , which scans at 2900 dpi for the Minolta 5400 as I want to be able to make exhibition size prints?

Goodnight people!

Finn, Dublin.
Finn is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:02 AM.