35mm film scanner adivce

Hi,
Terribly sorry if I bothered you with this very old question.
I will use the scanner for 35mm negatives and slides exclusively. I prefer
picture quality. Scan speed is not important. My budget is 500 USD or less.
Can you give me your advice ?
BTW, if the resolution is 3600 dpi, does it equal to 3.6 Meg pixels ?
Thanks again for your advice.

"2B" writes:

Terribly sorry if I bothered you with this very old question.
I will use the scanner for 35mm negatives and slides exclusively. I prefer
picture quality. Scan speed is not important. My budget is 500 USD or less.
Can you give me your advice ?

Probably Nikon Coolscan V.

BTW, if the resolution is 3600 dpi, does it equal to 3.6 Meg pixels ?
Thanks again for your advice.

No.

A 35mm negative is roughly 1 x 1.5 inches. So at r dpi, the pixel
count is roughly r * 1 * r * 1.5, or 1.5r**2. So a 4000 dpi scanner
gives you about 24 megapixels. Note that this number is *in no way*
comparable to digital camera megapixels. I can't precisely explain
the exact physics, but think of it as a "twice sampled" image, once by
the film grain and a second time by the scanner; scanned pixels aren't
nearly as "valuable" (for making good prints) as digital-original
pixels.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

"2B" writes:

Terribly sorry if I bothered you with this very old question.
I will use the scanner for 35mm negatives and slides exclusively. I prefer
picture quality. Scan speed is not important. My budget is 500 USD or less.
Can you give me your advice ?

Probably Nikon Coolscan V.

BTW, if the resolution is 3600 dpi, does it equal to 3.6 Meg pixels ?
Thanks again for your advice.

No.

A 35mm negative is roughly 1 x 1.5 inches. So at r dpi, the pixel
count is roughly r * 1 * r * 1.5, or 1.5r**2. So a 4000 dpi scanner
gives you about 24 megapixels. Note that this number is *in no way*
comparable to digital camera megapixels. I can't precisely explain
the exact physics, but think of it as a "twice sampled" image, once by
the film grain and a second time by the scanner; scanned pixels aren't
nearly as "valuable" (for making good prints) as digital-original
pixels.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

"David Dyer-Bennet" wrote in message
...
"2B" writes:

Terribly sorry if I bothered you with this very old question.
I will use the scanner for 35mm negatives and slides exclusively. I
prefer
picture quality. Scan speed is not important. My budget is 500 USD or
less.
Can you give me your advice ?

Probably Nikon Coolscan V.


Do you maybe know some website that has images scanned with the Coolscan V?
It would be very helpful if I could see some results before choosing to buy
that scanner.
Thanks
Tom