Minolta 5400 ordered.

Discussion in 'Minolta' started by Nighthawk, Sep 10, 2003.

  1. Nighthawk

    Nighthawk Guest

    New cameras abound huh?
    You're getting your minolta, I'm getting my elan, anyone else?
     
    Nighthawk, Sep 10, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Nighthawk

    Alan Browne Guest

    I just ordered my 5400 and to my great surprise not at B&H.

    A significantly better price was to be found right here in Montreal...

    B&H: US$829.95

    Montreal store: CAD$1019.95 (about US$745).

    The exchange, shipping and brokerage savings are around $225 even after
    Quebec and federal sales taxes.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Sep 10, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Nighthawk

    Alan Browne Guest

    (the 5400 is a scanner)
     
    Alan Browne, Sep 10, 2003
    #3
  4. Nighthawk

    kennyk Guest

    Pentax 645.


     
    kennyk, Sep 10, 2003
    #4
  5. Good purchase! In comparison to other well known machines, it's a bargain
    at the MSRP!

    Enjoy!

    Bill Tallman
     
    William D. Tallman, Sep 11, 2003
    #5
  6. Michael Benveniste wrote:

    Well, I understand there is a market for drum scans at up to 8000dpi for the
    best 35mm film. Apparently there is that much more to be gotten from some
    kinds of film.....
    Ever regret that you can't really crop a frame and enlarge it satisfyingly?
    Less of a chance of that with the Minolta, so I've found. YMMV.

    Bill Tallman
     
    William D. Tallman, Sep 11, 2003
    #6
  7. Nighthawk

    JIM Guest

    Looks pretty interesting here: http://robertdfeinman.com/tips/tip25.html
    I also own one and, other than timeframe of scanning(slow), it does an
    excellent to outstanding job. Just completed a 13"x19" print w/framework
    that I believe the customer will be more than satisfied with;)

    Shoot'em up, scan then digitize, Agfa, Fuji, Kodak and all the rest will
    love you for it!!

    Jim
     
    JIM, Sep 11, 2003
    #7
  8. That would also depend on what the area the camera exposes, but I measure
    23.85x35.85mm for the film strip holder of my scanner, and Minolta states
    24.61 x 36.69mm. You'll have to figure out if that is enough.

    Of course you can always add a frame afterwards, but in my case it pretty
    much exposes the entire frame, without causing glare and internal
    reflections when scanning print film.

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Sep 11, 2003
    #8
  9. Nighthawk

    Alan Browne Guest

    Right now I have an 8bit/channel scanner @ 2280 dpi. It does a good job
    for prints on a lab or home inkjet up to 10" or thereabouts. Scanning
    slides, it falls short in shaddow detail. The 5400, which is less
    expensive than its nearest techncal competitor(s), has dynamic range
    that is beyond most or all films, even after discounting the claimed
    Dmax to something more realistic. (~4 rather than 4.8).

    The resolution is perhaps overkill, but not by very much. This scanner
    **should** be my second and last film scanner. My flatbed that I've had
    for 5 years I will have for another ...? years.
    On top of the above, I also get the GEM and ICE which I don't have....

    With the 5400, 7650 x 5100 d scans are possible of a slide or negative.
    That will bring me to beyond 24" x 16" @ 300 dpi. I don't have a
    printer capable of doing that, but I can burn a CD-ROM and have 2 places
    w/i 20 minutes of my house do it for 'bout US$14.
    Then I suggest that any 14 bit/channel scanner with a resoltion of at
    least 3000 dpi would be adequate. That will give you a realistic Dmax
    of 3.7 or so which is just at the edge of what slide film has in dynamic
    range.

    Finally, is 5400 dpi the end? Probably not and wet (maybe dry too) drum
    scanners do get more detail out of a film. But that is way beyond my means.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Sep 11, 2003
    #9
  10. Nighthawk

    Alan Browne Guest

    I can't see "adsmiths" post, so replying to this one.

    For a negative, you can scan beyond the area of the 36x24 exposure...but
    not to the extent of the sprocket holes on the film strip. The Minolta
    film strip holders cover these holes. With negatives I usually do my
    scans with a lot of white (black on the negative) border in the raw
    scan. It gives a ragged edge. I've almost always cropped these edges
    off ...I do mainly color and the ragged edge look seems more appropriate
    to B&W.

    For slides in mounts, there is the problem that Bart alludes to below.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
    Do you mean the aperture in the film strip holder is this size, Bart?
    On my Scan Dual for both slide and neg, the aperture of the strips is
    significantly larger than the film or slides' exposed areas.
     
    Alan Browne, Sep 11, 2003
    #10
  11. Nighthawk

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    The software written for drum scanners was originally intended for,
    and works best with, slide film. Color balancing negatives is a
    tricky business, and even software packages that have been optimized
    for it, such as Kodak PhotoCD workstation, sometimes get colors wrong.
    Vuescan is another example that works well for many films but not
    as well for other films.
    That one scans well with Vuescan, so home scanner would probably
    be best for you.
     
    Bill Tuthill, Sep 11, 2003
    #11
  12. SNIP
    Yes, that's what I measure with my caliper. It will not allow to scan the
    entire frame plus a bit of the border. But it will almost entirely scan the
    exposed frame itself, at least for the exposed area from my EOS-3, which is
    23.85x36.05mm, so I only miss 0.2mm in the long dimension (or 1/127th of an
    inch for the metrically challenged ;-) ).
    Slide mount inside dimensions are usually a bit smaller yet (like
    23.00x34.80mm).

    I have no idea where the Minolta numbers in the documentation come from, but
    they are too 'optimistic'.

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Sep 11, 2003
    #12
  13. Nighthawk

    Alan Browne Guest


    I hate that! The scanner SHOULD scan beyond the edges of the exposed
    frame and the holder should not be designed that it crops parts of the
    image.

    It may be that Minolta are optimizing the stiffness of the holders in
    order to flatten the film as much as possible. I would forgive Minolta
    for the tight cropping if this is indeed the reason for it.

    I suppose for mouunted slides it's no big deal. (My mounts measure
    about 23 x 34.3mm (I don't have calipers at home). But slides CAN be
    scanned off of the mounts too!

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, Sep 11, 2003
    #13
  14. Nighthawk

    Generic Eric Guest

    Not at B&H? A victory for "born-again" Christians, Republicans and NRA
    members everywhere. :)

    (Pease, I'm just joking. Let's not all go at it again).

    -E
     
    Generic Eric, Sep 11, 2003
    #14
    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.