Nikon Scan that ships with the 5000ED would be better than Plustek's own software but probably not as good as SilverFast 6.5 Ai Studio with multiple exposure. SilverFast's Ai Studio with calibration target is expensive software. The histograms of these test targets look so different, I wonder if ScanDig simply used the scanner companies' own software in default mode when they scanned this target. Contrast is something that's adjustable in the scanner's software, or in Photoshop. I didn't think the difference between 3500 dpi and 3900 dpi would be that noticeable.
According to the test results at, the V700 with a claimed resolution of 6400 dpi actually delivers only 2300 dpi, or about 46 lp/mm. Perhaps we could say that the Plustek 7500 is certainly the best value scanner.Įdit: I should add that flatbed scanners such as Epson's V700 Photo with very impressive resolution specs are significantly worse than the Plustek 7500. Their review of the Konica-Minolta 5400 II, which is the scanner I use, but which was beginning to give me a bit of trouble last time I used it, has a tested resolution of 4200 dpi (The review is only available in German, however). However, the difference between 3500 dpi and 3900 dpi is marginal. The scanner review site you refer to above, describes the resolution of the Plustek as testing at 3500 dpi (which is far below spec) and the Nikon 5000ED as testing at 3900 dpi (which is very close to spec). A test target scanned at 7200 ppi should be much larger than one scanned at 4000 ppi. There's something wrong with the test target images you've shown.
0 kommentar(er)
