I found this link quite informative.
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson V700/page_1.htm
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Advice on Hasselblad 500CM purchase
- Thread starter Francois_A
- Start date
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson V700/page_1.htm
carstenw
Active member
The 750 review is very informative, especially the comparison with the Nikon 9000. I have heard that the Epson was good before, but I didn't realise that it came that close. This is like the whole 5D2 vs. MF discussion all over again, on a different level 
I suppose I will look closer at the Epson, since I only going to use it for old negatives and possibly some experimental work, mostly MF film.
I suppose I will look closer at the Epson, since I only going to use it for old negatives and possibly some experimental work, mostly MF film.dougpeterson
Workshop Member
Not unlimited. Phase P+ will produce a beautiful image for 20 minutes to 11 hours depending on the temperature. At 63F it can produce a beautiful image up to 1 hour, which is the spec most frequently cited. For extremely long exposure film is still the king.
Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One & Canon Dealer | Personal Portfolio
dougpeterson
Workshop Member
I remember when I first saw the EV-lock-and-twist design of the hasselblad lenses. True genius.
Doug Peterson, Head of Technical Services
Capture Integration, Phase One & Canon Dealer | Personal Portfolio
I'd have to agree with you Jack. I still have a Epson V750 Pro which is great for scanning contact sheets. It does a respectable job on 6X6+ negs IF ... big IF ... the film isn't challenging. You really can be fooled if you don't have something to directly compare it to. In my case it was the Minolta MF scanner that cleared up any confusion.FWIW Carsten, I had the Epson flatbed first and have both scanners now --- and the reason is, they aint that close
The way my dealer convinced me to step up my game even further was to lend me an Imacon 848 for a month. When the even better, faster Imacon 949 was discounted due to rebadging/repackaging it as an X5, I sprung for that.
Net result is that I ended up going back and rescanning everything over again.
Here's a tip, the V750 is well worth the money for scanning B&W silver prints. I had many prints where I couldn't locate the negs (in a storage box somewhere), you can actually pull digitally corrected files that are better than the originals.
carstenw
Active member
Thanks for the comments, Marc. So... "challenging" means what, exactly, badly exposed or perhaps large dynamic range?
I am not considering spending several thousand on a film scanner right now, so I am wondering if the 750 will give me satisfactory results from most negatives, ie. good enough to make a decent print, mostly B&W? I am not expecting the best possible results here, but I also don't want blocked up shadows, blown highlights or lacking tonality.
I am not considering spending several thousand on a film scanner right now, so I am wondering if the 750 will give me satisfactory results from most negatives, ie. good enough to make a decent print, mostly B&W? I am not expecting the best possible results here, but I also don't want blocked up shadows, blown highlights or lacking tonality.
The D-Max on the Epson is a fudged number, so don't be misled by it. As I said, the 750V Pro does do a respectable job, but struggles with shadow detail in dense negs.
And I've noted that there is a difference in sharpness which can be attributed to any number of things ... don't know what lens is used in the Epson, but the one in my Imacon is a Rodenstock ... and film flatness can be an issue that affects sharpness. When you do really high rez scans with the flatbed it takes forever and the film can heat up and POP. The V750 Pro comes with a glass fluid mount holder, but I don't know how it works and have never used it.
The Epson software probably isn't the best to accomplish what you are after. There are a number of other choices like Silverfast, but others here may be of more help on that subject since it's been so long since I've used anything other than Flexclor with my Imacon.
If you are using traditional B&W films be aware that the "Ice" dust/scratch removal options do not apply. It cannot be used with traditional B&W emulsions. It does work with C41 B&W films. Dust is an issue with flatbeds because the light is very specular. This is true for a number of dedicated scanners also. Users of MF Minolta Multiscan units resorted to inventing a diffusion light source which did wonders (that scanner now has cult following, and if you could find one it'd be about $800-$1,000.) The Imacon 949 already has a diffused light source, and the scans look more like the results you'd get from a traditional enlarger.
The biggest difference is in shadow detail and specifically with B&W negatives -- the two scanners are eons apart in that situation, like 2 or more stops more usable range in the shadows. Detail in well exposed areas is about what he shows, though I would say the 9000 does notably better than he showed if you do a 4-pass scan. You can even eek a bit more with a 16-pass scan from the 9000, but to me it usually is not worth the added time required over the 4-pass -- nice to have the 16-pass capabilities if you need it though.
One of the biggest benefits to the 9000 IMO is the extra IR channel for dust removal. I use VueScan to run my scanners, and the IR dust removal protocol of VueScan in conjunction with the dedicated IR channel of the 9000 generates a super clean scan -- WAYYYY better than Nikon's ICE -- so clean I maybe have to remove 4 or 5 larger dusts from a 6x7 neg and that is it. (Yes, it is really that good!)
Like Marc, I do use the flatbed for a quick scan contact sheet of an entire page of negs or tranny's --- and frankly, having the flatbed is worth it for that capability alone! And also agree with Marc, that scanning an 8x10 print from a tough neg on the flatbed definitely generates a superior file to scanning the tough neg on the flatbed -- again, the benefits of a dedicated film scanner get huge when you work with a tough negative or tranny.
Cheers,
Stuart Richardson
Active member
Most scanners only have one exposure setting. The imacons allow you to use "adaptive light" which gives you a brighter scan tube (or maybe just a longer exposure, I am not sure). I am not sure if the epsons can do this.
You can do a form of HDR multi-scan scan with VueScan and the 9000, but I've never needed to use it, so never experimented with it...
Oh I get it... Well, seems it might be pretty easy to do two separate scans, one for the shadows, another for the highlights. But it isn't an exposure adjustment per se, rather playing with the curves to pump the shadows. Since this is a file gain operation, it will likely increase noise. But since you don't need to move a holder, they should line up easily enough in CS where you can layer and blend them. Lot of work, but you can probably gain a stop or so of DR...
carstenw
Active member
It seems that if the shadows are the main disadvantage with the V750, and if this is only in "challenging" shots, and if it is possible to get a 1-stop improvement with the V750 with your trick, then there is a cheaper way of getting most of the results, as long as one is willing to work more to compensate. I will meditate on this
Stuart Richardson
Active member
I have not used the V750 myself, but I will comment about a general feature of scanners. Generally what you pay for going up the scale is moderately better resolution, better software, greater dynamic range, better out of the box files and much greater speed. My scanner journey went from Minolta Scan Dual III to Scan Multi Pro to Imacon 646. The Scan Dual III did pretty well with 35mm, but only up to 2820dpi. The Scan Multi Pro went to 4800dpi and did really well in terms of resolution. Color was a bit difficult to get perfect, particularly with color negative. It was quite slow, especially with multi-pass scans. You needed the glass carrier to get edge to edge sharpness on medium format. Overall it is a great scanner and I highly recommend it if you can find one.
The Imacon is leaps and bounds faster, resolution is quite similar, though it has more bite to the detail (and no ICE). It does dramatically better with color negative, has great edge to edge sharpness without a glass carrier, has greater dynamic range and scans up to 4x5 in any type of carrier you want, you can custom order them.
Anyway, the general point is that the more you pay, the faster they go and the less work you have to do.
The Imacon is leaps and bounds faster, resolution is quite similar, though it has more bite to the detail (and no ICE). It does dramatically better with color negative, has great edge to edge sharpness without a glass carrier, has greater dynamic range and scans up to 4x5 in any type of carrier you want, you can custom order them.
Anyway, the general point is that the more you pay, the faster they go and the less work you have to do.
Francois_A
New member
My experience with the Epson V700, which is supposedly as good as the V750 regarding dynamic range, is that when I do a scan for the shadows, any highlights bloom into the dark values, and this is a major PITA to mask in Photoshop! Still, I can not retrieve all the shadows details that are clearly visible when the slide is on a light table.
I am just wondering, if the 9000 and the Imacon are able to retrieve the shadow details visible with a light table without clipping the highlights?
I am just wondering, if the 9000 and the Imacon are able to retrieve the shadow details visible with a light table without clipping the highlights?
It's not just the shadow detail. Sorry, but you can do every trick in the book with a flatbed, and a beat-up old Polaroid Sprint Scan will beat it.It seems that if the shadows are the main disadvantage with the V750, and if this is only in "challenging" shots, and if it is possible to get a 1-stop improvement with the V750 with your trick, then there is a cheaper way of getting most of the results, as long as one is willing to work more to compensate. I will meditate on this
Spending $$$$ on MF and good lenses to get the best we can and then scanning with flatbed doesn't make sense ... unless the end use isn't that important. IMO, buy a used dedicated film scanner.
People that swear by a flatbed are usually people that have never used a dedicated scanner so they don't know what's possible from their films.