|
|
|
|
I've just completed a preliminary comparison of output from these two scanners. My conclusion, in short, is that slide scanners are just like stereo components -- you can spend five times as much for something 25% better, and you can be sure that few people can really tell the difference!!
The HP Photosmart is a real bargain at $299 (after rebate), especially when you consider it can scan up to 5x7 prints as well. It is very compact, easy to use, and its capabilities can be greatly enhanced if you use Ed Hamrick's VueSmart scanning software. The HP has 2400 dpi resolution, 30-bit color depth, and an optical density rating of approximately 3.0. This is a much better way to scan photos than using a flatbed or a flatbed plus slide adapter.
The Nikon LS-2000 is available from BuyComp for $1600. It scans slides and negatives, and has much better scanner control software than the HP. It is also very compact. It has 2700 dpi resolution, 36-bit color depth, and an optical density rating of 3.6. Using the scanner's 16x oversampling mode kicks the optical density up to around 3.8 - nearly equal to a $30,000 drum scanner.
Steve Hoffman has put together excellent reviews of both scanners at http://www.sphoto.com/ls2000.html and http://www.sphoto.com/photosmt.html .
UPDATE: HP has released the 36-bit Photosmart S20 film scanner at a price of $499. It has better color fidelity than its predecessor, but is still limited somewhat by its optical density capabilities. It seems to do a better job minimizing banding and other noise patterns. Steve Hoffman has posted a comprehensive beta review at http://www.sphoto.com/s20.html .
I've reached the following conclusions after completing my comparison scans:
- The HP is a steal. It does a great job with well-lit slides, and does a fairly good job with negatives.
- The Nikon produces consistently more saturated scans, which look exactly like the source slides.
- Boosting color saturation on HP scans doesn't reproduce the Nikon's color depth and fidelity.
- The HP cannot handle deep shadows. This is a physical limitation of the HP's density capabilities.
Scan bands and noise patterns limit your ability to bring out detail. VueSmart minimizes this...
HP - why didn't you add multiscanning capability to your new S20 model?- The Nikon does great, noise-free negative scans, but the color balance requires a lot of work. Nikon's color management software is inaccurate and unpredictable. Scan with color management turned off!!
The Nikon would be a steal at, say, $1000, but at $1600 seems pricey relative to the HP.
Now, on to the scans. I've done four sets of scans on my first tests. I'll call the first three The Good, The Bad (well, the OK), and The Ugly. Then I added a comparison of a Photosmart 4x6 Print scan with the HP and Nikon slide scan equivalents. Some of these scans are a little large, so be patient...
The Good: Fuji Velvia scan near sunset.
The Bad: Kodacolor 200 daytime shot.
The Ugly: Fuji Sensia outdoor flash shot.
Photosmart print scan vs. Photosmart slide scan Vs Nikon slide Scan: An Ektachrome shot in fog.
