sirius wrote: >>- Image quality - sharpness: The Canon was definitely sharper and more >>snappy on the same image. This could be (and I suspect it is) the >>effect of >>Digital Ice vs Canon Fare. I intend to do another test with Ice off >>(unfortunately I scanned all my Canon samples with Fare on) The >>difference >>was very obvious and before sharpening, the Minolta scans looked >>pretty bad >>compared to the Canon's. > > > Is this the experience of other people too? > > i am planning to buy this scanner. but sharpness is crucial.
Not for me, but I am a pure amateur and have only had this scanner for a few weeks. It was an upgrade for the Nikon Coolscan III (ls30) and to me it seems far superior (in all aspects, contrast included). I have no Canon scanner to compare with, so I have no idea how it works compared to that. I also find that there is less reason to use ICE with this scanner than the LS30. Haakon ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
