----- Original Message ----- From: "Johnny Zasada" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I feel the same as you about the price/performance-ratio of MF film >scanners. Did you use any other scanner for MF before Epson? Right now I'm >wondering if it would make sense for me to upgrade from an Umax Astra 4000 >to the Epson. Don't know if the difference is that huge. >High-Res flatbed scanners are becoming the poor medium-format mans film >scannner. No, I didnt have a MF scanner before, I bought it following the warmest recommendation of a professional photographer who bought it recently and who has the Polaroid 120, he said he now prefers sometimes the Epson to the Pola because results look somehow more natural - he has gotten excellent results up to 40x50cm and good ones up to 50x75cm from a 6x7neg. He also said that up to 40x50 (about 16x20") the Epson is as good as a 5 year old 20.000$ Linotype scanner (I forgot the model - maybe a Saphire). One thing is for sure: The extra dpi of a 4000dpi scanner are only blowing up files extremly, even 2400dpi prints much larger than a 1160 or 1290 can ever do.... On the other hand, the Polaroid, Nikon and Minolta is certainly better in the fine detail and shadows, but I seriously doubt if you will see it on a 13x18 print. Bernhard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
