Epson scanner

Discussion in 'Scanners' started by Terry Davis, Oct 2, 2006.

  1. Terry Davis

    Terry Davis Guest

    I am looking to purchase a scanner for my negatives. Has anyone used the
    new Epson V750-M Pro?

    This is a flatbed scanner. Is this ok for negatives or should I invest
    in a dedicated film scanner instead?

    Terry
     
    Terry Davis, Oct 2, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Terry Davis

    John Guest

    Try this one :

    http://www.promarketinc.com/catalog/scanners/howtekscanmasterd4500.html

    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    Legacy-photo.com - Xs750.net
     
    John, Oct 2, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Terry Davis

    Rob Novak Guest

    I've got the V700. Good for MF or larger, adequate for 35mm.
     
    Rob Novak, Oct 2, 2006
    #3
  4. Terry Davis

    Peter Guest

    I saw a 750, last week, at Photokina. There was a comparison being
    shown that an individual had run on a black and white negative. He had
    scanned the same negative with the 4990, the V-700 and the V-750. The
    newer models seemed just slightly better than the 4990, but I couldn't
    really be sure. The 750 comes with better software (although it was
    possible to conclude that part of the reason might be that some of the
    software that came with the 4990, might not be included any more).

    Additional features seemed to be claimed for the 750, but I didn't see
    any way to reach an opinion on them among the crowds and with what I
    had with me (e.g., no sample negative).
     
    Peter, Oct 2, 2006
    #4
  5. Terry Davis

    Alfred T B Guest

    IIRC, from a review that I read, the 750 comes with the full version of
    silverfast rather than the SE version as standard and the fluid film holder
    for large format. Apparently this made it worth the extra over the V700

    ttfn
     
    Alfred T B, Oct 3, 2006
    #5
  6. Terry Davis

    Alfred T B Guest

    Why only 'adequate for 35mm' please?
     
    Alfred T B, Oct 3, 2006
    #6
  7. Terry Davis

    John Guest

    LOL ! Adequacy for an inadequate format !


    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    Legacy-photo.com - Xs750.net
     
    John, Oct 3, 2006
    #7
  8. Terry Davis

    rafe b Guest


    Define "adequate," John.


    rafe b
    www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    rafe b, Oct 3, 2006
    #8
  9. Terry Davis

    rafe b Guest


    Smaller film area, compared to MF or LF.

    For decent-sized prints (say, 8x10") from 35mm
    the V700/V750/4990 are marginal.

    rafe b
    www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    rafe b, Oct 3, 2006
    #9
  10. Terry Davis

    John Guest

    Define "marginal" Rafe.

    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    Legacy-photo.com - Xs750.net
     
    John, Oct 3, 2006
    #10
  11. Terry Davis

    John Guest

    35mm makes really, really good 5X7's. But not as good as my RB67 or my
    Linhof 5X7 ;>)

    And from Webster.com

    Adequate - sufficient for a specific requirement <adequate taxation of
    goods>; also : barely sufficient or satisfactory <her first
    performance was merely adequate>

    Yep. That's what I said. Inadequate. Insufficient for a specific
    requirement. Not satisfactory. Still better than digital though ;>)

    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    Legacy-photo.com - Xs750.net
     
    John, Oct 3, 2006
    #11
  12. Different folks have different perceptions: One man's
    outstanding is another man's unacceptable.

    I have a 4990 and would say, for me, that its 35mm
    scans are OK for the web but not for making other than
    proof [or 4x6 'holiday snaps'-type] prints. But my
    'average' 35mm shot is done with a Micro-Nikkor, TechPan
    and a tripod - so if you aren't a PITA anal-retentive like
    me you may find the Epson's 35mm scans are just great.
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Oct 3, 2006
    #12
  13. Terry Davis

    Rob Novak Guest

    645 gives you almost 3x the film area per frame, and 6x7 more than 4x.
    You can make an 11x14 printed at 300dpi from a 1600 dpi scan (a 15Mpx
    image) of 6x7. At 3200dpi, you're about at the maximum of what the
    scanner can really do optically - I don't see sharper scans with more
    detail at or above 4800dpi, even though Epson claims 6400. This is
    just a compromise of fixed focus scanner lenses used by flatbeds that
    have to be "sharp" with paper right on the glass and film several mm
    above it. Still, at 3200 dpi, you're into 60+ Mpx land and damned
    near a 20x30" from 6x7.

    For 35mm, I need better scans than what any flatbed can provide in
    order to get good 11x14 enlargements - about 4000dpi to be exact. I
    consider the minimum for an 8x10 print to be 2700dpi, damned close to
    the edge of usable resolution from a flatbed. I use a dedicated 35mm
    scanner - a Minolta 5400 - and utilize its variable focus to get
    maximum sharpness down to the film grain. Then it becomes more a
    limitation of the film, not the scanner, as to how much visual
    information can be extracted.
     
    Rob Novak, Oct 3, 2006
    #13
  14. Terry Davis

    Rob Novak Guest

    It also is supposed to have low-dispersion glass in the scanner array
    lens for increased contrast.
     
    Rob Novak, Oct 3, 2006
    #14
  15. Terry Davis

    rafe b Guest


    Silly boy. You can't say what's adequate without
    stating the "specific requirement."


    rafe b
    www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    rafe b, Oct 5, 2006
    #15
  16. Terry Davis

    rafe b Guest


    Look it up yourself, John. And why do you care,
    anyway?

    I'll paraphrase: if one intends to work with 35 mm,
    there are scanners that will do a much better job
    than the V700/V750/4990.


    rafe b
    www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    rafe b, Oct 5, 2006
    #16
  17. Terry Davis

    John Guest

    Quality 11X14 inch images ?

    ==
    John S. Douglas
    Photographer & Webmaster
    Legacy-photo.com - Xs750.net
     
    John, Oct 6, 2006
    #17

  18. Thanks for that belated (and not insignificant)
    qualification.


    rafe b
    www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    Raphael Bustin, Oct 6, 2006
    #18
  19. Terry Davis

    Greg \_\ Guest

    John cited the Aztec drum scanner, I work with 4x5 for personal work but
    have a large file of 35mm & 120 stuff I would love to market.
     
    Greg \_\, Oct 6, 2006
    #19

  20. What the heck, if you have money to burn, you
    definitely should get the Howtek.. or ICG or Screen
    DTS or Scanmate. Don't let me stop you.

    The 120 media (or smaller) willl scan very nicely
    on a Nikon LS-8000 or 9000.

    The Epsons are a great value (I own and use
    one) but they don't compete with the Nikon
    models.


    rafe b
    www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    Raphael Bustin, Oct 6, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.