But are they bad?
I use a V700 for 120 and larger. It's perfectly reasonable for preview. In fact I say good.
I never use those epson files for printing.
May as well use a digital camera.
The epson smooths grain too much..... My biggest complaint.
I wouldn't call them terrible but they're a long way from the output from a high end scanner. Of course it depends on how large you're going to reproduce from a specific format. 35mm they're not good for much enlargement unless you get a film holder you can adjust the height for proper focus. I don't use mine for 35mm but have seen ok results with adjustable holders.
I use my 750 to scan 8x10 negs, full page negfiles for digital contacts and prints. It's fine for my use. All other formats are done on my Imacon 848.
The big differences are sharpness and actual dynamic range. The lens in Epsons machines are ok but not great. Focus is not accurate so grain is mushy. Dynamic range isn't what epson claims as is the case with lower priced scanners. All in all though they'd can be setup with good holders and good scans can be made from negs especially larger ones.
The Imacon is t really a drum scanner. It actually a flatbed that the film moves around a drum as it travels over the CCD. The film holders and the curvature around the "drum" help keep the film flat and do an excellent job. The lens is I believe a Rodenstock Apo lens. I could be wrong about the brand but seem to remember the tech at Hasselblad said it was. I think all but the 343 autofocus. I owned one before getting a Fuji Lanovia Quattro.
The Imacon / Hasselblad machines are excellent but they come with a high price. The Imacon and other high end scanners use a cold cathode light not led. This produces smoother tones but retains sharpness much like diffusion enlarging heads. The CCD is too of the line and focus is precise. I might be wrong but I think the 848 has an actual Dmax rating of greater than 4. Figures on top of the line machines are generally accurate. Speed is another advantage of better machines along with durability.
I owned both a Fuji Finescan 5000 and Lanovia Quattro. Theyre essentially the same machine with the LQ being a later model and faster. These machines autofocus up to a depth of 10mm and use XY axis scanning. XY axis ensures ever bit of the 13x18 film platen is the sweet spot. The performance is the same no matter where you put your film. Dmax exceeds 4 and the speed of scanning is unmatched with the LQ. Resolution is a true 5000 dpi. There are 3 premium Apo process lenses made by fuji in them. Depending on the enlargement dictated which lens. These are remarkable machines.
I bought my Fuji machines from Fuji direct. These are very large, complex and crazy expensive. New they were in the $40k range each without accessories. They are big and accomidate film on the platen up to 13x18" or in special holders. You can fill the plate with mixed types of film, color negs, transparencies and B&W negs and scan all together. You can setup each piece of film individually and then push a button and come back in a short while and your scans will be done.
Shortly after I boughtvtge Fuji machines Fuji discontinued their scanners, parts, service and phone support. Fortunately I have some experience in broadcast engineering and bought a bu cb of spare parts like servos, bulbs, belts and boards. I had all the calibration negs and 500 page service manual. Fortunately I was able to keep everything going except the 5000 which developed a bad logic board and I couldn't find a spare. I even bought another machine for parts but that board was missing.
As mentioned the machines are huge, 150 pound. They run on legacy computers that you have to keep running and the software will only run on XP, os9 and early OS X. This is provided you have the software and the dongle with unlock codes. I was fortunate in that I had all the platforms of software and a computer with os9 & OS X as well as an xp machine. I also had all the dongles and unlick codes.
I saw tge end coming when I couldn't get parts so I sold it. Hated to see it go but I replaced it with the 848 Imacon. It's not as versatile but pretty much the same level of scan.
It's sad to say but scanners like the older Imacon units before FireWire, Cezanne, Fuji, Agfa and most drum scanners run on legacy software and machines. They're hard to repair if at all possible and expensive if you can. The only two pro level scanners currently made to my knowledge are the Kodak IQ Smart and Aztec drum scanner. The Aztec I brlievevis around $70k and the IQ starts around $15k and go up or atleast used to. Kodak service is very expensive and unless you have their service contract they won't sell parts.
I'm afraid the epson machines and Plustek film scanners are about the only game in town for new machines that are acceptable.
