thinfor

Thanks for the link.  Really great shots and nice scanning performance of the Nikon scanner.

Actually I'm using Canoscan 8800F and the performance is not bad too.  Wheny buying it, I've spent some time collecting information and comments from users and struggled which model should buy.  Among the scanners, Nikon prodcuts are the 'oldest' but the most expensive.  Some people said it might be due to its ability to prevent dust.  But I really don't know whether it's true or not.

Do you have any ideas about making Nikon scanners more outstanding to have such a premium?  I'm just curious (since I may not switch my scanner now) and your comments are very appreciated.

thinfor

Thanks for your comments.  Actually, I am more film-based.

I've compared the configurations among the well known flatbed and Nikon's.  They are generally similar.  Digital ICE mentioned may be only owned by Nikon's.

Your scanned images seemed to be much better than other flatbed scanners do.  Is the digital ICE technology a key for better images or other technology that I overlooked?

Can I ask whether you have spent much time on fine-tuning the scanned film images?