Thanks Byron, your overview is very helpful. Hope I can manage to find the
> > hi,
> > I am looking for a flatbed scanner for 120films both slide and
> > Just wondering which of the following is the best deal?
> > Epson E 1600 Pro, it cost a lot...., Dmax 3.3 1600*3200dpi, powerful
> > software, duo focus thing.
> > Epson 1200U, a third of the cost of 1600pro but the Dmax is only
> > 1200*2400dpi.
> > Umax 2200, the cheapest, 600*1200dpi, Dmax unknown, should be less
> than 3,
> > tons of software.
> > or do you have suggestion is not in my list? I will mostly use the
> > for printing with my Epson 1270, so I mostly looking for quality
> > reasonable price. thanks for your help.
> LOW-END (600DPI CLASS) MF SCANNERS:
> Umax 2200. I have the Umax 1220S. Same specs as the 2200. It is a
> small notch below the Epson 1200U in sharpness, noise, and shadow
> performance. In any case, the Epson 1200 is getting pretty low in
> price these days and is a little better if one wants to try the
> Canon FS1200. A "fake" 1200 dpi unit like the Epsons but similar in
> quality. Some claim it's better than the Epson 1200 although I
> haven't seen any results to comment. It's probably comparable.
> Epson 1200. I have this unit (you need the Photo version for film).
> It is a very nice scanner and based on 35mm scanning I'd say you can
> get a pleasing but quite soft 8x10 from MF. It's a little weak in the
> noise department, has a few radiometric problems above 600 dpi and of
> course has the infamously overspec'd resolution weakness. I know some
> MF users that are satisfied but most would like something better.
> MID-LEVEL (1200DPI CLASS) MF SCANNERS:
> Epson 1600. I've seen 8x10 printouts on an 870 that looked very good
> although when viewed critically they are a little soft so I can't see
> getting to 1270 sizes except for casual printing. Better noise
> performance than the 1200, more quality control complaints, and the
> same dubious resolution specs as the 1200U.
> Umax Powerlook III. A true 1200 dpi and coming down in price. Some
> love it, others claim it has too much noise and poor shadow
> performance compared to the Epson 1600. I've seen very nice scans
> from it on the Web. Operator knowledge/skill seems to play a role in
> getting good scans with this unit.
> Canon FB1210. A true 1200 dpi unit with 42 bit depth. Released in
> Japan at a fraction of the current Powerlook/Epson1600 prices. Could
> be a sleeper or could be a dud....too early to tell.
> Umax 4000. Another true 1200 dpi at a fraction of the comparable
> Powerlook or Epson 1600 units. I've seen some results that are quite
> poor but they were flawed due to operator skill so I'm still waiting
> for good examples or an informed review.
> Microtek X12USL. Another true 1200 dpi scanner coming in at the new
> price point for 1200 dpi scanners. 42 bit depth. Microtek usually
> makes good scanners.
> Microtek Artix Scan 1100. A true 1100 dpi flatbed/film scanner
> combo. Overpriced in my view.
> Minolta Scan-Multi film scanner. I've seen some great scans and
> excellent 8x10 printouts from it. A true film scanner it can expose
> the RGB channels independently. This is critical for maximum DMAX
> performance with negatives. A weakness with most flatbeds.
> HIGH-END (>1200DPI) SCANNERS:
> Agfa T2500. A true 2500 dpi. I see some very fussy users that are
> effervescent about this scanner. Never heard a complaint either so it
> probably does the job.
> The new Polaroid MF unit. Somewhere around 2500 dpi as I recall. In
> any case, the price was so astronomical it blew my mind and I've
> forgotten the model number... :))
> There are others but you'll need your Bank Manager shopping with
> you... :)
> The 2500 dpi class provides sharp full size printouts from the 1270.
> The 1200 dpi class provides sharp 8x10s. The bottom level is 600 dpi
> which limits you to sharp 4x6s. This is based on using these various
> scanners...I haven't done the actual dpi calculations but I'm sure
> it'll be close.
> Of course passable results can be achieved for larger sizes. The
> suitability in that case depends totally on your individual
> expectations and standards.
> In any case, 1200 dpi seems to be the "magic number" for MF printing
> for the average user.
> IMHO, the new true 1200 dpi units from Canon, Umax and Microtek
> probably represent the best quality at a reasonable price. But it's
> early days and we'll have to wait for the reports.
> Photo Resolution tests
> Epson 1200U Tests, Examples and Homemade Transparency Adapter
> The Truth About Scanner Resolution Specs
> Canon FS2710 Film Scanner Examples