|
Recent Additions
Cameras
Other Digital Darkroom Portraiture Sports/Action Lighting Outdoor/Travel Wildlife Film & Processing Photo Allies Blog Co-Op Forums Galleries Photo News Past eNewsletters David B. Brooks Jon Sienkiewicz Turn Your Hobby Into Cash Industry Voice Glossary Trade Shows Workshops Photo Links Shutterbug Radio Manufacturers Contact Us Outdoor Tips Travel Tips Portrait Tips Sports Tips Lens Tips Software Tips Family Tips Editor's Notes Talking Pictures Picture This! Features Book Reviews Student Union Point of View Web Profiles Exhibits Photo Clubs News & Notes Help Digital Help Business Trends Digital Innovations Globetrotter Master Class Passport The Darkroom Catalog Showcase Shutterbug Shopper Photo Lab Showcase Service Directory Free Product Info Classifieds Photography Lighting Digital Photography Equipment Film Processing Lexar Media Camera Lenses |
Konica Minolta’s DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 II; The Best 35mm Scanner Gets Better And More Affordable
I must admit I was surprised that just two years after I reviewed the Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 the company would come out with an improved and substantially modified new model. As I noted in my report then, the 5400 was well ahead of the game in performance and value. So, what motivated Konica Minolta to make such a major change so soon? It is probably due to a number of factors, some of which I cannot even guess. But the fact remains, the company has in the 5400 II provided a substantially better scanner at an even more affordable price. So, who is foolish enough to look a gift horse in the mouth? Not me, you can be sure.
Although the new 5400 II looks like and is in many ways closely related to
its predecessor, there are significant differences. The shape is quite similar
and the film holders are almost identical, so we must assume the internal mechanics
are closely related. But, the chassis is just a few millimeters wider, so it
does not require the strange “foot” of the original to sit on a
desk upright, at least without falling over sideways too easily. The outer case
of the 5400 II is not as “pretty” to my eye nor as substantial looking
as the original, and the new model is also considerably lighter in weight.
Part of the new 5400 II’s much faster speed, I am sure, is partly due
to the change in the scanning light source from a cold cathode tube to a White
LED. In other words, to make a scanner run faster requires a higher level of
exposure, thus light through the film medium. This naturally provides a shorter
exposure time for the CCD sensor to read and record the values. In the past,
Digital ICE worked more effectively with a cold cathode light source, so the
latest version, Digital ICE4, is probably improved to be more effective with
an LED light source. Quite possibly the new White LED technology also provides
the better infrared radiation that’s required by the Digital ICE4 dirt
and dust sensor. Other technical performance changes include a 16-bit A/D converter
and increased CCD sensor dynamic range, now 4.8 in the new 5400 II.
Before I get into the full test I would like to mention some plug-in and Utility
caveats. While the new Easy Scan Utility mode may be attractive to the lazy
and indifferent, before even getting into my test work I received an e-mail
from a user complaining about it. The e-mail said that the automated Easy Scan
mode arbitrarily crops into a 35mm image, eliminating often crucial portions
of the picture.
How Well Does It Work?
I began by using the native Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Utility to be able
to manually adjust and correct a preview before making a final scan. Other than
some changes that reflect the new physical feature improvements and additions,
this DiMAGE Scan Utility software is little changed. To be candid, all hardware
manufacturers do not complement their products fully with very modern and effective
software. I am not singling Konica Minolta out because all scanner makers, and
for that matter many digital camera makers, apparently do not see user software
as requiring the same effort and development as hardware. The resulting manual
tools provided to adjust and correct an image are reminiscent of what we worked
with in Version 4.0 of Photoshop a decade ago.
Article Continues: Page 2 »
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||







