Anyone use the Epson V700?

[Lord Fluff]

Is this a good buy? I was looking at the Nikon Coolscan V LS-50, but it is much more expensive (in the UK) and no-one has any in stock anyway.

All opinions very welcome.....

 

[__hh]

I have one, and I'd say that it is perfect in every way... well....EXCEPT for the fiddly and (seeminly) flimsy film holders. I have only used the 35mm negatives holder. I must say that it has not failed/broken on me (yet), but for a $700 AUD scanner one would expect more in terms of build quality (even if it is only an accessory).

If you can live with flimsy film holders, I'd highly reccommend it.

Hung

 

[maddoc]

Is this a good buy? I was looking at the Nikon Coolscan V LS-50, but it is much more expensive (in the UK) and no-one has any in stock anyway.

All opinions very welcome.....

Yes, I do. The V700 replaced my Nickon CoolScan V ED for a couple of reasons. A) MF scanning B) faster workflow when batch-scanning 35mm film (up to 24 frames in one go) The Nikon has a - theoretical - better resolution but - from my experience - also needs some fine adjustments in focus / exposure to achieve high quality scans.

From my Epson V700 (I have the Japanese version GT-X900) I get scans from both, MF and 35mm film, sufficient enough for web and printing up to A0 size (tested with MF film on an Epson Maxart A0 printer)

Drawback of the Epson, the film holder are clumsy and especially the 35mm film-holder is next to useless with CURLY film. The ANR glass-inserts did the trick for me. Nearly all my scanned photos in my flickr account are scanned with the Epson, some of the older with the Nikon.

cheers,

maddoc

 

[Lord Fluff]

Speedy response - thanks guys!

Maddoc - I've seen a lot of your work and to know that it came from the Epson....well, that's a good enough endorsement for me!

Thanks again

 

[kully]

I'm biased because I have a LS-50 for sale 🙂

They both have DICE which is great for C41/E6, I havn't noticed any difference between this in the two.

V700
+ You can load it up with four strips of six / 12 slides / 120 strips and let it do it's thing (1 hour for 24 frames of 35mm, 2400dpi, 24bit colour)
+ It does medium/large format too
+ As you say, cheaper
+ Good enough for my enlarging needs (35mm/6x6 >> 12x8)

LS-50
+ Faster if you just want to scan a few frames off a neg, DICE is faster too. 2 minutes for a frame.
+ Sharper, more detailed scans
+ Less dust on the negs / Don't have to keep cleaning the bloody scanner glass.

You'll be happy with either of them.

 

[mfogiel]

Lord Fluff
If you took so much care in selecting your camera and lens, choosing a flatbed for 35mm is pure nonsense - that is, unless you want to make 5x7 prints, and in that case, I'd say, a nice disposable plastic camera will do just as well.

 

[Sofa King]

Lord Fluff
If you took so much care in selecting your camera and lens, choosing a flatbed for 35mm is pure nonsense - that is, unless you want to make 5x7 prints, and in that case, I'd say, a nice disposable plastic camera will do just as well.

oh, how wrong you are.

 

[Lord Fluff]

mfogiel - is this opinion based on experience or bias? Everything I have read points to the Epson producing superb results

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson V700/page_18.htm

In fact the V750 produced results that stood up well in comparison to $5000 film scanners.

I know the flatbed aspect seems wrong - but the evidence seems to indicate otherwise....

 

[Krosya]

Yes, I do. The V700 replaced my Nickon CoolScan V ED for a couple of reasons. A) MF scanning B) faster workflow when batch-scanning 35mm film (up to 24 frames in one go) The Nikon has a - theoretical - better resolution but - from my experience - also needs some fine adjustments in focus / exposure to achieve high quality scans.

From my Epson V700 (I have the Japanese version GT-X900) I get scans from both, MF and 35mm film, sufficient enough for web and printing up to A0 size (tested with MF film on an Epson Maxart A0 printer)

Drawback of the Epson, the film holder are clumsy and especially the 35mm film-holder is next to useless with CURLY film. The ANR glass-inserts did the trick for me. Nearly all my scanned photos in my flickr account are scanned with the Epson, some of the older with the Nikon.

cheers,

maddoc

I second this - my reasons and opinions exactly.
It really comes down to what you want from it. Epson is very good for web and 8x10 prints, maybe even 11x14. If you need a bigger print you are should be looking at a film only scanner.
Most people dont need anything bigger and thats where V700 works out great, yet with some minor (listed by maddoc) issues.

 

[maddoc]

Lord Fluff
If you took so much care in selecting your camera and lens, choosing a flatbed for 35mm is pure nonsense - that is, unless you want to make 5x7 prints, and in that case, I'd say, a nice disposable plastic camera will do just as well.

Well ... I had both film-scanner in parallel (Nikon V ED and the Epson V700) and from the results I got with 35mm film, there was not that difference in quality of the scans, which justify for the time needed, fiddling with the clumsy film-holder SA21 of the Nikon...

When the negatives are CURLY, both the Epson AND the Nikon don't do a good job. For the Nikon, the FH-3 film-holder was a must for me as the ANR inserts for the Epson. If you get perfect flat, laboratory-processed film strips, no problem at all with both scanner.

 

[palec]

I have v700 and I'm happy with it, but really don't expect to make large prints with it. 8x10 is really the top. I use it for web and previews, for prints I use enlarger and wet process. For 35mm film only go with dedicated film scanner. It's worth the money and time.

 

[mfogiel]

Lord Fluff,
I have both the V750 and the CS 9000 (which has the same resolution as CS 5000)

My quick point is: with the flatbed you lose one format quality, so your Leica becomes a Pen F and your Summicron becomes a Soligor. Since it seemed to me like you are a pro who wants to do the rf shooting for pleasure, keep the pleasure and not the PITA.

 

[oscroft]

I'll add another vote for the V700. I bought mine to replace an earlier Epson 3200, and it beats it quite significantly - obviously it does better resolution, but it also produces significantly better colour gradation (and B&W tonal gradation) and density range than my old one. I haven't compared it to a Coolscan, but it is superior to a friend's Polaroid dedicated neg scanner (though that's a few years old now).

I use the V700 for 35mm and 120, and I get very nice results from both B&W (Tri-X) and chrome (Fuji Sensia). And the resolution is good enough for me to see the grain in the results quite clearly (so it's clearly not reducing my photos to the equivalent of a Pen-F with a Soligor, let alone a plastic camera 🙄 )

Its other big strength for me is being able to scan 12x35mm slides, or 24x35mm negs, at a time - I have a large backlog of photos to scan and that is really speeding me up.

My only criticism is as others have said - the film holders are a bit flimsy and fiddly.

 

[maddoc]

One more thing ... If you compare the CoolScan 9000 ED with the Epson V700 then things change, quality-wise. But that scanner has a much higher price-tag... 😱

 

[projectbluebird]

My quick point is: with the flatbed you lose one format quality, so your Leica becomes a Pen F and your Summicron becomes a Soligor. Since it seemed to me like you are a pro who wants to do the rf shooting for pleasure, keep the pleasure and not the PITA.

I'd have to disagree with you there mfogiel. That might be true with many consumer-grade flatbeds, buut not the V700. I've used both the V700 and the Nikon Coolscan 9000, they are about equal in terms of output up to 11x14 or so (with 35mm). Beyond that, the Nikon jumps ahead, but at the cost of speed, and price.

You have to be more careful with any flatbed scanner to keep the glass clean. They can also have focus problems, especially with the V700's flimsy carriers, but the super-expensive dedicated film scanners are not immune to this either, and they're more costly to service.

With the V700, Epson is trying to do with the scanner market what they did to the inkjet market. I'd say they've done a remarkable job. A scanner that can do film as well as documents, all the way from sub-miniture up to 8x10. for $500 or so. (here in the states)

 

[mr_phillip]

I'll add another positive vote for the V700. I bought one the week they launched in the UK and find it gives excellent scans from both 35mm and 120 film. I'd agree that the holders don't inspire much confidence, but in use I find that the 35mm holders actually work just fine and have stood up to regular use much better than I feared they might. The MF holders however … well they just plain suck.

 

[kipkeston]

Flatbeds sound like such a nice idea until you can't scan a single frame without newton rings or out of focus frames. I was fed up with epson tray, newton rings and out of focus negs and went with the V.

mfogiel, you have some of the best scans I've seen on screen.

 

[1948nikon]

Epson light source and lens

Epson light source and lens

The v700 , as I understand uses a different form of light source and a higher resolution lens . Can someone give me more details on this. Not tech specs but real world benefits.

 

[gdi]

View Camera magazine had a review of the V700/750, but I can't find it online. But here is a link to comments by the reviewer Ted Harris. It has a quick summary of his view based on large format use, which should parallel MF. (IMO, if you are only scanning 35mm then the scanner to get is the CS V.)

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=19759

 

[oscroft]

Photo-i has a review of the V700 here.