MegaPixels sells the Microtek Artixscan 4000TF (=Polaroid SS4000 plus) in UK for �799 inc. vat/ �680 ex vat.
http://www.megapixels.co.uk/merchant/Film_Scanners.htm Chris Street > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Philip Elkin > Sent: 22 April 2002 23:12 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Microtek vs Polaroid (was SS4000 Plus not > to Europe!) > > May I ask what price you have found for the 4000tf in the UK > > regards > > Philip > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 9:51 PM > Subject: [filmscanners] Microtek vs Polaroid (was SS4000 Plus not to > Europe!) > > > Philip Elkin wrote (of the Polaroid Sprintscan SS4000 Plus) > > > I tried to get one here in England but with no joy. > > so Robert Michael suggested > > > Or go for the Microtek articscan 4000tf which will come to Europe > and is > > essentially the same thing > > >From the web page (and checking some UK dealers) the price for the > Microtek > looks quite good. > But I know in the past Polaroid have always stressed that the SS4000 > was > "tweaked" in some way > (firmware? stricter QC?) to make it perform better than the Microtek > 4000t. > I assume they would > claim the same for the SS4000Plus against the 4000tf. (Although the > latter > does come with its > very own dust cover!) > > Has anyone had any direct experience of both the SS4000 and 4000t? > Obviously, there will be > some differences between Polacolor Insight and the Microtek software > but is > there a real > difference between them when using, say, Vuescan or Silverfast? > > I notice that the Microtek 4000tf has multisampling. I wonder if > this is > simply to match the facilities > offered with other scanners like the Nikon LS-4000 or whether it > actually > needs it? > > My interest in all of this is that my recently purchased SS4000 will > have to > go back: when I move it > and reconnect it (it's too big to live permanently on my desk), it > gives a > CCD error message and > stops at the calibration stage. At the next attempt, it previews but > the > preview image is solarised > and streaked. Next go, just the streaks remain. Finally, at the > fourth > attempt, the preview looks > fine. (The same preview corruption happens if I use Silverfast > instead.) It > then remains fine until > the scanner is moved again and the same thing happens. > > In addition, I've had the scanner get stuck in the calibration cycle > and > make a noise like it's going > to self-destruct so I've had to switch off. Also I've had it > completely > crash the PC a couple of times > as well as treating the slide holder as a negative holder or just not > recognising it properly! > > All in all, this particular unit doesn't inspire confidence - > especially > it's apparent need to bed in after > being moved. As this was the last one available, I'll be getting a > refund. > So the hunt for a scanner > continues..... > > I did like the SS4000, in particular the resolution and lack of > noise, but > it didn't really do very well > with the shadow detail in some of my dense slides. The extra dynamic > range > of the of the 4000tf > could certainly make it a candidate unless anyone has any horror > stories > about its predecessor. > > > > > Al Bond > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------- > ------------ > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message > title > or body > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------- > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message > title or body ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
