Epson V700 vs Coolscan (Image inside)

I've got the Nikon CS9000 and I've had the pleasure of using the Epson V700 for about a month. Overall I have to say that the CS9000 does a somewhat better job on 35mm, especially when I use a glass holder. ( I use the FH869GR holder and the 35mm panorama mask one frame at a time.) It seems to equal out for 6x6 in that I would be perfectly content with the Epson. There is nothing wrong with the CS 9000 and I really like it for what I do.

For a all round scanner I'd have the Epson for it's ability to scan up to 5x7 and maybe 8x10 negs. Then you have a real good flatbed scanner as well.

I did not realize how good the Plustek scanner is. Maybe the Plustek as well as the Epson would be a good pair. Some basic 'rithmatik; Plustek about $550 add Epson about $650 = $1200.00 or Nikon CS 9000, no longer manufactured at about $2500.00 (or more?)

Just a thought.
 
tammons said:
Use a sharper image.

Try some bluefire or other microfilm in a super sharp rangefinder for a better judge of exactly what the real resolution is and the enlargement potential of each.
Click to expand...

Again, I see film grain in the examples above. There is no signal beyond grain. What practical relevance would a test with microfilm and lab conditions have? No one is shooting microfilm in the wild anyway.

The V700 looks pretty good to me for practical use. I also actually like the fact that it slightly smoothes out film grain compared to the dedicated scanners that seem to pronounce it.
 
Simple. If someone shoots a really fine grain film like Pan-F or Tmax 100, a real film scanner still shows the grain. Will the Epson have enough resolution to do so? That's why you should test with a very fine grain film. Microfilm may be going too far, but you do need something finer grained than the slide the OP scanned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom