Scanners - Fluorescent v LED


J

John

Scanners - Fluorescent v LED

I know that the newer LED scanners can scan a lot faster than the old
cold cathode fluorescent ones, but I have heard/read that the old
fluorescent lamp scanners give better results for prints. Is there any
truth in this so far?

I've not heard anything regarding the scanning of slides and negatives
as far as the quality is concerned for Fluorescent v LED so I am
assuming the LED is better for slides and negatives?

So, LED lamps gives faster scans but are not as good quality wise for
scanning prints?

Also from a manufacturer perspective, in the past with the cold
cathode fluorescent scanners, Epson have always given better results
quality wise than Canon, however Canon scanners have always been much
faster at scanning and only a short step off the pace in terms of
quality. I am just wondering if much has changed with the arrival of
LED scanners? Will Epson have caught up to Canon in terms of speed,
LED v LED scanner, or would Canon still be ahead on that count?

Thanks for your input and Happy Christmas.

John
 
Ad

Advertisements

C

Chet39

I have two LED scanners (Canon standalone and part of a HP combo). Both
give excellent results on color prints. My first scanner was a fluorescent
and I found that the color results changed as it warmed up.
 
B

Barry Watzman

There is no reason why the change in light source would directly impact
the speed of the scanner either way.
 
Ad

Advertisements

O

Obakesan

to John


I don't think its a factor of the lighting, rather the mechanical design.

its true that scanners which happen to use LEDs are faster, but I seriously
doubt that this has anything to do with the light source so much as the rest
of the design.



yes, although they handle things differently. You'll find that you NEED stuff
like digital ICE on the LED based scanners, while the fluro types can get away
without it.

personally if I was not doing 4x5 sheet film, I'd have the Nikon 4000 or
500 rather than my current Epson (even the LS-40 and 50 are better than my
epson).

if you believe that, thats fine.

if you're intersted at this thread:

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00NhzG

there is a comparison between an epson and a nikon 8000 done on a neg of mine
for testing against my 20D


indeed ... same to you :)


See Ya
(when bandwidth gets better ;-)

Chris Eastwood
Photographer, Programmer
Motorcyclist and dingbat

please remove undies for reply
 

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. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top