ELITE 5400 II scanner pdf manual download. Konica Minolta Photo Printer User Manual. Prices seem to be going absurd high these days, and specially the mark 1 aren’t known to be the best built devices around.View and Download Konica Minolta ELITE 5400 II online. DiMAGE Scan Elite II: - Corrected the problem that noise may appear in vertical direction at the left end of the image by I’m happy with my Dimage Scan Elite 5400 (mark 1). - Added JPEG and TIFF to the file format which can be selected in Batch Scan Utility. Driver improvements for: DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400: - Corrected the problem that noise may appear in vertical direction at the left end of the image by scanning after cropping with Digital ICE selected.I’m even going so far as to say it’s too sharp :).The Dimage Scan Elite II is a very capable scanner (much like the previous Dimage Scan Multi Pro, though without the medium format film capability), but at the same time scores big in the ease-of. The lens inside is sometimes harvested as being an insane crazy macro lens.If I were to compare it to my no longer available Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 II, the Konica Minolta does a better quality job of scanning slides, but not nearly as good a job scanning color negatives, both of which are largely a function of the Plusteks lower dynamic range and the Konica Minoltas much higher D-max, even though both. I tried the vue scan software which i used for my older scans using the hp photo scanner.Sharpness is insane though. Scanning at an optical resolution of 5400 dpi, this Konica desktop scanner is great even for office use.The konica minolta dimage scan elite 5400 ii has the dimensions 70 x 165 x 345 mm, which is a normal size for a film scanner, but with a weight of 1.5 kg it is an absolute lightweight. It takes just 25 seconds for a single frame to be scanned by this Minolta film scanner. Scan old photographs using the Konica Minolta Elite 5400 II scanner, before they crumble to pieces or turn yellow over time.But with the automatic cleaning with the use of the IR channel the final ‘time per final scanned, cleaned and converted image’ actually isn’t that much different (although the Minolta 5400 on full 5400 DPI is actually very slow. But although all pictures were trialed with NLP (2.0 I believe), the colors of the DSLR scan were ‘off’, while they were instantly pleasing and fine with both the dedicated scanners.So I settled on using dedicated scanners… They take longer, yes. The DSLR ‘scan’ was pretty close as well. The 5400 won clearly in the sharpness, but after applying a bit of sharpening the Crystalscan actually wasn’t that far behind (the film was the limiting factor) while it reaches at most +/- 3300 DPI I believe. The film was a modern Vista+ 200 (or 400, not sure).But the Silverfast version had issues specific to the reverse-engineered protocol of this scanner and they don’t seem to be able / willing to develop it further. For ‘modern’ computers: The scanner does work with Vuescan and there is a Silverfast 8 version. I’m an IT pro so I can live with the challenge, but I wouldn’t recommend it to any novice. Vuescan and / or Silverfast (modern versions) on modern OS works just fine, but the scanner has other quirks (like needing to be turned off and on every +/- 6 scans to prevent banding artifacts, and the light source not being that strong).The Minolta is a software nightmare. I also get good results scanning DSLR-style… but every once in a while I get an image where the focus wasn’t right, or I get light bleeding in a corner all of the sudden… and the conversion results from the dedicated scanners seems to be more ‘right’ from the get go as I said.Software with the Crystalscan is fine.
Konica Minolta Dimage Scan Elite 5400 Ii Driver Improvements ForManually focus is a pain with Vuefast (at least with other software you can manually focus while you see a live indicator on the screen to tell you when you turned the focus knob in the right position. It seems to report an area as being ‘in focus’ while it absolutely isn’t, so you end up with blurry scans. But others have reported left sides of the image being darker or off, because of some internal-calibration missing.In my experience Silverfast’s own IR detection also seems to misinterpret the IR data this scanner ‘scans’, so using automatic cleaning causes artifacts and issues.Vuescan works but can’t focus properly. Minolta-scan can’t batch scan an entire film holder of 6 images so every image has to be started manually, but otherwise it works fine.Minolta-scan and Silverfast 6 require a 32 bit OS. I never use the inversion from these programs, only the raw (‘scanned as positive’) linear-tiff files. And the (auto) focus is consistently good and you can queue up scan jobs from the film-holder (so it can scan up to 6 in a row automatically once you set it up).Minolta-scan is tricky to set a custom exposure but it’s very possible, has good focus and delivers good (raw-scanner) results. Silverfast 6 uses ‘official Digital ICE’ ir cleaning which works fine with this scanner, so no artifacts. Notepad for mac alternativeThat’s why DSLR scanning has come up so much. Pro work (shooting images for money) -> yes, it would be worth it, but wouldn’t you be better of using a pro lab then anyway? For hobby stuff -> I doubt it’s worth the price and hassle. Most consumer-film doesn’t resolve that much more, let alone if you manually focus your camera :).After looking at a lot of images scanned at more than 2000 DPI, and then scaling it down (And then back up) and comparing… I wonder if it’s worth it :).Depends what you use it for I guess. Yes, the Minolta reaches more (and so does a good DSLR scan) but I wonder if you really need it. I have used both VirtualBox (free) and VMWare Player (free) as virtual-machine utilities to run Windows XP and pass-through the USB connection for the Minolta, and this is how I scan.I never used a flatbed scanner for film scanning, but most flatbed scanners I’ve read of don’t reach beyond +/- 1800 to 2000 DPI (While claiming 9000+ or something). You will inevitably run into minor and major problems, from time to time you will need to open up the scanner and service something yourself, email with Vuescan and Silverfast staff because of issues and so on. I tried to cover for it in LR but that was just way to much work.If you are looking for “scanner project” go ahead and get one. The 5400 (I and II) do have one of the best lenses ever build inside a scanner but they also have a really uneven lightsource that often can be seen in magenta/green gradients and darker stripes in the pictures. Although 5400 dpi sounded fantastic, in real life it meant a horrible long scanning time and huge files. Using Silverfast and Vuescan on a Mac and WinXP the software quite often freezed In my personal case I wouldn’t go for a dedicated film scanner again, mainly because of convenience: ![]() With dslr scanning it’s just less time with the roll, and more cleaning up on the computer.I queue up a strip in the holder, prep it (crop,rotate,focus point) and hit 'go’aand I come back 30 minutes later to start the next strip.Every time I tried scanning with dslr, eventually I rescan a part of it on my Minolta.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorDenice ArchivesCategories |