Robert writes: > Is there a qualitative difference between > the Nikon 4000ED scanner and the Nikon 8000ED > scanner?
Not a significant one, I don't think. The 8000 uses a three-line CCD array to scan, whereas the 4000 uses a one-line array, but that's about it, and I don't know that the 8000 does any better job in consequence than the 4000 (and the 8000ED banding phenomenon has already been mentioned--when you use the three-line scan mode, scans are done faster, but the risk of banding exists). The 8000ED has a different lens, but not necessarily a better one (more elements and groups). > Does the 8000ED simply handle larger > rmats besides 35mm, or is there some other > significant difference between the two > scanners? The multi-format capability seems to be the only real difference. It's a big one, from a mechanical standpoint, but from a scan quality standpoint it doesn't seem to make any difference. > Note that new 4000ED's can be had for about > $1100.oo and new 8000ED's are being advertised > for about $2300.oo on the price scan web sites. If everything you are scanning can be scanned on a 4000ED, you should probably stick with the 4000ED. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
