Auteur: David G (82.230.20.---)
Date: 30-03-2005 09:22
trouvé sur un forum
"After doing an APX 25 BW negative resolution test, in which it fared similar
to the 4870, I tested it with MF colour negatives. The scans were certainly
marginally higher resolution than the 4870 and the images were sharper too.
The size and speed of the F3200, and the possibility of buying a refurb one
at a discount clinched the deal. The F3200 has much better resolution than
the CNET touted Microtek i900, which was ranked above the 4870.
The 4870 was giving the equivalent of a perfect 2800 dpi at best, but could
be worse, depending upon film bow. The F3200 was consistently delivering
2500 dpi. It had less colour fringing and was considerably faster. My
Expression Pro only delivered about 900dpi. In various reviews I have seen
4870's on a par, or slightly worse than a F3200. I think the one I borrowed
was particularly well aligned.
The other thing I like about the F3200 is the f3200 is the ability to scan
6x12 negatives. Also, unlike big flatbeds, there does not seem to be a sweet
spot, so more consistent scans seem to be more likely. In all of this, it is
quite obvious that results vary between similar models, depending upon
manufacturing tolerances.
There is a review of the F3200 on Photo-I, but IMHO it is flawed. The main
comparison is done with mounted slides and then the author admits to there
being a problem later on and demonstrates a significant better resolution
with unmounted slides. I told me in a private email that if he had re-done
the first part of the review it would have been clearly better. However he
was of the opinion that he just tested it as it came to him. Slide mounts
vary in thickness, so it seems that the F3200 has a shallow depth of field.
Regards Chris Woodhouse MEng. ARPS
chris.woodhouse@ktphotonics.co.uk
Darkroom resources and products www.ktphotonics.co.uk
http://www.photokb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/photo-large-format/1339/What-Scanners-are-you-using-for-LF
|
|
