Jamie123
Veteran
Does the V700 offer any significant gain in quality over the 4990 for 4x5 scans? I have a 4990 which I haven't used much in the past since I got a Nikon 9000 for 35mm and mf but recently I started shooting 4x5. Is it worth 'upgrading' or should I just save the money and pay for proper scans instead?
Frank Petronio
Well-known
It's slightly better according to some of the "experts" on the LF Photo Forum and I would trust that it's true. But not by very much - maybe slightly less shadow noise, maybe more real world resolution when you overscan and then reduce to a working size.
But the biggest quality gains are from learning how to scan properly, to get the full range that you want, master the software... and that is free.
And the second biggest quality gain is to use the flatbed to scan and proof and make moderate-sized prints... then you'll know which negatives are worthy of spending more money on to get nicer drum scans from someone like Lenny Eiger or another custom, one-person drum scan operation.
(Sending stuff out to a random, faceless drum scanner, the lowest priced, well... it's not a good idea.)
But the biggest quality gains are from learning how to scan properly, to get the full range that you want, master the software... and that is free.
And the second biggest quality gain is to use the flatbed to scan and proof and make moderate-sized prints... then you'll know which negatives are worthy of spending more money on to get nicer drum scans from someone like Lenny Eiger or another custom, one-person drum scan operation.
(Sending stuff out to a random, faceless drum scanner, the lowest priced, well... it's not a good idea.)
venchka
Veteran
Use the 4990. MAYBE invest in a Betterscanning mounting station. Practice. Practice. Practice. Spend the extra money on supplies and trips for your camera. That will improve your photography.
Particular
a.k.a. CNNY, disassembler
Use the 4990 as Frank suggests.
I have rented a Flextight scanner before to do amongst other things 4x5 scans. The highest resolution it can do is 1200dpi and besides that it chewed up one of my chromes because of a faulty holder the scan quality was good. Soon after I got a discounted new 4990 for about as much as the rental cost, which easily gives me equal or better scans. By my estimation with a nice flat negative adjusted to the right height etc. you don't really gain much detail over 2000dpi. What I tend to do is scan at 4800dpi and reduce by 3 to 1600dpi or scan at 2400dpi and half it to 1200dpi. The scans are nice and crisp. I doubt that much can be gained by using the v700's 6400dpi mode. It just seems like overkill.
I have rented a Flextight scanner before to do amongst other things 4x5 scans. The highest resolution it can do is 1200dpi and besides that it chewed up one of my chromes because of a faulty holder the scan quality was good. Soon after I got a discounted new 4990 for about as much as the rental cost, which easily gives me equal or better scans. By my estimation with a nice flat negative adjusted to the right height etc. you don't really gain much detail over 2000dpi. What I tend to do is scan at 4800dpi and reduce by 3 to 1600dpi or scan at 2400dpi and half it to 1200dpi. The scans are nice and crisp. I doubt that much can be gained by using the v700's 6400dpi mode. It just seems like overkill.
bensyverson
Well-known
4990 plus some ANR glass to mount the negative above the scanner glass.
The V700 is an extremely meager improvement over the 4990. Like the difference between a 15 and 16 megapixel camera.
The V700 is an extremely meager improvement over the 4990. Like the difference between a 15 and 16 megapixel camera.
fbf
Well-known
4990 was an absolute bargain. Epson realized that so they discontinued it immediately after v500 was out. I personally think 4990 was better than v500 and v700. Not sure about v750. I bought my first 4990 refurbished for $100 shipped two years ago. People are buying them used for $200 on ebay now. It tells you something.
sanmich
Veteran
I had a 3200 and after that a 4990, and mostly scanned 35mm with them.
Took me some time to realize that one side of the 4990 was poorly focusing.
after some experimentation, I realized that the glass was probably slightly tilted.
I tried the same with my father's 4870, and the same problem arised, although not as bad.
I'm not sure (was a few years ago), but I think I checked a V700, and it was ok, maybe after playing with the holder height.
My conclusion at the time was that the sample variation is much more a problem than the incremental improvements between models.
I'm not sure if this is really relevant at 4x5, but I don't see a reason why it wouldn't be.
Today I would buy either a 4990 or a V700, but only from a source that I can easily send it back for a replacement. I would thoroughly check focus on five spots on the glass (four corners and center) and decide to keep it or ask for a replacement.
Took me some time to realize that one side of the 4990 was poorly focusing.
after some experimentation, I realized that the glass was probably slightly tilted.
I tried the same with my father's 4870, and the same problem arised, although not as bad.
I'm not sure (was a few years ago), but I think I checked a V700, and it was ok, maybe after playing with the holder height.
My conclusion at the time was that the sample variation is much more a problem than the incremental improvements between models.
I'm not sure if this is really relevant at 4x5, but I don't see a reason why it wouldn't be.
Today I would buy either a 4990 or a V700, but only from a source that I can easily send it back for a replacement. I would thoroughly check focus on five spots on the glass (four corners and center) and decide to keep it or ask for a replacement.
Jamie123
Veteran
Thanks for the input guys. I think I'm fairly proficient in using the 4990 as I've had it for 6 years and used it extensively until a couple of years ago when I got the Nikon. I know I could get a Betterscanning holder (I have one for mf) and even wetmount. The problem is, the best quality the 4990 is capable of (IMO) isn't really worth going through all that trouble and it looks like the V700 isn't much different.
Using the 4990 for proofs and having drum scans made of select images was the original plan but they're pretty expensive where I live (around $150 for an archival drum scan). Another idea is to rent time on a Flextight X5 which also costs $150/hour. The X5 scans 4x5 at 2040ppi (not 1200 as CNNY suggested). The Hasselblad website says max scan speed for 4x5 is 1.23min so I figure I should be able to at least do 10 scans in an hour.
Using the 4990 for proofs and having drum scans made of select images was the original plan but they're pretty expensive where I live (around $150 for an archival drum scan). Another idea is to rent time on a Flextight X5 which also costs $150/hour. The X5 scans 4x5 at 2040ppi (not 1200 as CNNY suggested). The Hasselblad website says max scan speed for 4x5 is 1.23min so I figure I should be able to at least do 10 scans in an hour.