why is the Nikon 9000 scanner nearly half the price of the previous 8000?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by nobody nowhere, Apr 7, 2004.

  1. The specifications of the 9000 seem to exceed those of the 8000 (eg. 16
    bit instead of 14 bit), so why the difference in price? What has the
    8000 got which the 9000 doesn't?
     
    nobody nowhere, Apr 7, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. nobody nowhere

    zbzbzb Guest

    The specifications of the 9000 seem to exceed those of the 8000 (eg. 16
    It will probaly that last in their line of scanners, maybe?
     
    zbzbzb, Apr 7, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Nothing. The 8000 was overpriced, and they're just admitting that at
    US$3,000 there's no market for the thing. In Japan, the 9000's the same
    price as the 8000 was.

    The 9000 _might_ fix a couple of minor irritations the 8000 comes with.
    Given how bad grain noise, even in slide film, is at 4000 dpi, the 16 bits
    vs 14 bits bit is totally bogus. 12 bits would be plenty.

    zbzbzb asked: "It will probably that last in their line of scanners, maybe?"

    Heck, I don't even understand why they made an MF scanner in the first
    place: the only MF camera Nikon ever made was a Rollei TLR knock-off, and
    that camera may not even have gotten to the prototype stage.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Apr 10, 2004
    #3
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.