I have a V750 PRO. I use it for normal scanning of documents and old family photos ... and originally got it to scan my library of B&W prints from years ago ... which it does wonderfully.
I have scanned negs from a Contax 645, Mamiya RZ, Hasselblad 203FE, and from my Hasselblad H2F with film backs ... the RZ pics being the best because of the 6X7 film size.
These were done on the 750 (or the Epson model immediately preceding it), because the demand of the image quality was low ... proofs, proof sheets, web use, and small prints.
There are a number of factors to consider besides published resolution numbers, and the debate as to which is best. I can say from experience that debate is fruitless.
At the final print size you want to make, none of the arguments mean much. Using any of the above cameras with the best films available, the Epson will be the weakest link in the imaging chain. My very first Medium Format film dedicated scanner (a Poloroid model), was better.
The D Max of the V700/750 isn't very good at holding shadow detail, so in pratical terms, the numbers they publish are less meaningful, or how there arrive at those numbers. Who cares? It isn't very good.
I don't even know what kind of lens is used in the V750 or if there is even one :ROTFL: ... the Imacon/Hasselblad scanners use Rodenstock lenses by comparison.
Scanning at the best multi-pass resolutions takes an eternity on the flatbed, and keeping the film flat with Medium Format films is difficult during long scan times. If you are using a vacuum film back on the Contax, that feature will be wasted.
So, I'd have to agree ... you get what you pay for, and there are no magic short-cuts to high image quality ... especially at those print sizes.
Depending on how many images you really need scanned ... it may be better/more economical to use a high-end scanning service that caters to art photographers. Or maybe there is a place where you can rent time on a Hasselblad or Imacon scanner.
-Marc