Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Dimage Scan Elite 5400

Reply
Thread Tools

Dimage Scan Elite 5400

 
 
Melvyn Kopstein
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-22-2003
I had alot of responses to my recent post on rec.photo.equipment.35mm
regarding film scanners. I was trying to decide between Nikon's Coolscan IV
and 4000ED models. Many responses opined that Minolta's new Dimage Scan
Elite 5400 scanner would be a superior choice. The Nikon scanners have been
out a few years and have excellent reputations. At this point, I will
select either the 5400 or 4000 ED. With the Nikon rebate the cost
differential is essentially zero. The big question I have is how the
Minolta scanner fares compared with the 4000ED.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Chien
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-23-2003
5400 basically kills the Nikon. Completely replaces it and puts in
higher resolution, better performance, etc. Figure it's the newest
model out, so of course they'd have time to fix any problems competing
with the competition.

Of course, it only begs to ask "what does Nikon have up their sleves?"

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jason O'Rourke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-24-2003
Alfred Molon <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>But if you scan a 24x36 mm negative at 5400 dpi you get a 38 Megapixel
>image, which at 16 bit colour yields a 219 MByte file. Now, at the very
>best a negative has less than 9 Megapixel of resolution (and that only
>without camera shake and excellent lenses), so scanning it a 5400 dpi


And so begins the trolling.

There's little question that the 4000dpi scanners are better than the
2900dpi ones. (and the latter already pulled in 12mp). Whether or not
the gain to 5400 is worth something is hard to say. The one review cited
in this thread was done by a guy who owned an old nikon LS-30. Of
course he saw improvement.

--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jim Holland
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-25-2003
Good Morning!

> HRosita wrote:


> Hi,


> I just got a Minolta 5400 and sold my Nikon IV.
> Excellent move. The Minolta gives excellent slide scans
> right out of the box, no need to "fiddle" with the
> curves, etc.


> Minolta also has real good slide and film holders.


> The overall color rendition is much better than the
> Nikon IV ED (2900 resolution).


> The ICE options is absolutely amazing. Took out the
> black spots (fungus) and did not harm the image.
> Rosita


What is the asking price of the 5400?

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <>

Jim

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <>
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bart van der Wolf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-25-2003

"Alfred Molon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) news.com...
SNIP
> It is widely accepted that a
> negative doesn't have so much resolution - so the question remains, what
> is the point of scanning a negative with such a high resolution ?


It is widely accepted that negatives tend to scan as more grainy than slides
do. Part of which is caused by grain-aliasing, and that can only be reduced
by a smaller sampling pitch.

Bart


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bart van der Wolf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-25-2003

"Jim Holland" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
SNIP
> What is the asking price of the 5400?


Depends on your geographic region, but I've frequently seen it quoted for ?
895,00 (incl. VAT).

Bart


 
Reply With Quote
 
HRosita
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-25-2003
Hi Jim,

You can get it at PCNation.com for $845 and free shipping. Also J&R will price
match it.
Rosita


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bart van der Wolf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-25-2003

"Alfred Molon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) news.com...
SNIP
> So should one scan a 5400 dpi, transfer the 38 MPixel image into
> Photoshop and downsample to - let's say - 10 MPixel ? In other words,
> use the high resolution to oversample the negative ?


In general, that's the best approach.

> I'm asking as I'm in the process of buying a scanner and it will be
> either the Minolta Dimage Elite II (2820 dpi) or the Elite 5400.
> Currently leaning towards the Elite 5400 because of the USB 2 interface
> and partly because it just costs a little bit more, but has so much more
> resolution, which might be useful one day.


Given the choice, I'd go for the 5400. It also has a built-in diffuser that
will help in graininess and scratch suppression (even on silver based B&W
film). What's more, 5400 ppi is close to the limit of detail in most films,
so there will not likely be a need to rescan your films.

Bart


 
Reply With Quote
 
Rafe B.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2003
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 09:58:34 +0100, "badgerfish"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>3 reasons for a 4500 scanner.
>
>1. Minolta is desperately seeking to keep its SLR customers on board. With
>no DSLR & not one in sight, they are leaving in droves to other brands. I
>have seen evidence this little 'sweetie' is keeping some of them.
>
>2. Much of the consumer technology out there is a solution looking for a
>problem. The problem in this case is that unnecessary scanning up to 5400
>DPI pulls out so much grain and detritus from a neg that Minolta have
>invented a blurry thing in the scanner to make it look better.
>
>3. Minolta have done this because they can.........



I think perhaps your item #3 has a grain of truth to it.

Having the very-highest dpi rating of any current
prosumer CCD film scanner will get them some press
and win them some market share.

The fact that the "gain" is mostly illusory isn't all that
important in the big picture.

Frankly, I'm surprised at *any* new developments
in the film scanner market, as I expect that market
will dwindle and fade away over the next several
years.

If my own experience is any indication, I think the
switch to a quality dSLR is a one-way street.
Folks are not going to be pleased with the drudgery
& cost of film and film scanning once they've
worked with a decent dSLR.

In fact, I am worried about my MF cameras and
LS-8000, and wondering how much use they
may get in the near future...


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
Philip Homburg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-12-2003
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Rafe B. <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Frankly, I'm surprised at *any* new developments
>in the film scanner market, as I expect that market
>will dwindle and fade away over the next several
>years.


I expect that there are lots of serious amateurs who want to digitize
film in a couple of years. Maybe labs are picking that up and start offering
high quality scans to the general public. But in the mean time, it is
better to get your own scanner.

Especially when you are used to doing your own color corrections (and
printing), you don't want to hand some slides or negatives to a consumer
lab for a printing. (I don't want to hand my film to a consumer lab
for scanning either).

I guess that if I simply ask for 4000 ppi, 16-bit/channel in either tiff or
png, then a relatively small number of frames will cost me as much as a
new Minolta.



Philip Homburg
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 II problems resolved hellman@stanford.edu Digital Photography 0 11-13-2005 08:41 PM
Nikon Coolscan V vs Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 Fausto Digital Photography 1 07-15-2004 09:59 AM
DiMage Scan Elite 5400 - low compression as default Steffen Digital Photography 1 06-09-2004 01:37 PM
Preview Image in the Image Adjustment Window (DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400) Steffen Digital Photography 2 05-06-2004 05:31 PM
Minolta Dimage Elite 5400 Scanner and J&R HRosita Digital Photography 3 07-19-2003 12:16 PM



Advertisments