aad
Not so new now.
The 4990 looks a lot like 4490, especially the loss of detail on slides.
sf
Veteran
RObert Budding said:I just looked at the scans on George's site - the film scanners pull out a lot more shadow detail than did my Epson. I guess I'll save my pennies and buy a Nikon Coolscan 9000.
yeah. I noticed a huge difference in my scans from the Epson 3170 vs Multi Pro. I have detail where I thought it once was only darkness.
Dmax 3.2 vs 4.8.
Big difference.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Well... $200 vs $2500 ? I'd expect something in change for such a price difference.
George, have you sold the multi pro finally? I see it's gone from the ads list.
George, have you sold the multi pro finally? I see it's gone from the ads list.
RObert Budding
D'oh!
Have you read the photo-i and Ken Rockwell "reviews" of the Epson 4990? They claim that it's so good that you won't need a film scanner. I always doubted that claim - now I can see how absurd that claim was. Still the results aren't bad for a $400 scanner. But I'll wait for a real scanner before plunding in - too much labor is involved to use an inferior scanner.
sf
Veteran
I have sold my Multi Pro. Not happy about it, but oh well. It was an unnecessary luxury. I have actually bought the Epson V700 to replace it. And, while the V700 feels like a toy compared to the Minolta, it performs remarkably well.
This is a scan of some Neopan 100 developed in Arista Premium developer.
Minolta crop, V700 crop, Minolta full image.
This is a scan of some Neopan 100 developed in Arista Premium developer.
Minolta crop, V700 crop, Minolta full image.
Attachments
sf
Veteran
here is E6 (provia 400F) scanned at 4000 dpi on the V700 and 3200 dpi on the Minolta.
The V700 image has been sharpened 1 pxl at 100% and color and curves have been adjusted to try and match the minolta. Came close enough.
V700 full image / Minolta full image
The V700 image has been sharpened 1 pxl at 100% and color and curves have been adjusted to try and match the minolta. Came close enough.
V700 full image / Minolta full image
Attachments
sf
Veteran
and here are the crops
v700 unedited, Minolta unedited, V700 edited to match minolta.
I notice the V700 is noisy when sharpened, it doesn't have perfect color, and it has a very very slighly narrower dynamic range as is visible in these scans. The V700 is close in terms of resolution on this slide - which is a reasonable real-world sort of shot instead of some test pattern. The V700 does smooth grain nicely in B&W.
Bottom line, buy the dedicated scanner for slide film. I actually like the V700 more for B&W. So far.
I also notice the V700 has not the nice subtle colors that the Minolta has so well. This might be an issue for scanning portraits.
v700 unedited, Minolta unedited, V700 edited to match minolta.
I notice the V700 is noisy when sharpened, it doesn't have perfect color, and it has a very very slighly narrower dynamic range as is visible in these scans. The V700 is close in terms of resolution on this slide - which is a reasonable real-world sort of shot instead of some test pattern. The V700 does smooth grain nicely in B&W.
Bottom line, buy the dedicated scanner for slide film. I actually like the V700 more for B&W. So far.
I also notice the V700 has not the nice subtle colors that the Minolta has so well. This might be an issue for scanning portraits.
Attachments
Last edited:
Gid
Well-known
Its an interesting exercise, but ultimately it just dissolves into pixel peeping. The real test is what the final print looks like - something that the guy at photo-i makes a point of. There are so many other factors that can affect the final image - film, exposure, focus, lens used, development - that scanner performance makes a much smaller relative difference.
I use the Epson 4990 and I'm happy with the results I get using Silverfast both from 120 and 35mm - B&W, C41 and E6. The best results by far are from B&W and E6 (at least to my eyes). This doesn't mean that I couldn't improve upon the results by using a high end scanner, but would they be noticeable to a print viewer (who BTW probably wouldn't have a loupe or densiometer to hand
)
george,
IMHO, you haven't lost much switching to the V700 from the Multi Pro, but you've gained some $$
I use the Epson 4990 and I'm happy with the results I get using Silverfast both from 120 and 35mm - B&W, C41 and E6. The best results by far are from B&W and E6 (at least to my eyes). This doesn't mean that I couldn't improve upon the results by using a high end scanner, but would they be noticeable to a print viewer (who BTW probably wouldn't have a loupe or densiometer to hand
george,
IMHO, you haven't lost much switching to the V700 from the Multi Pro, but you've gained some $$
Share: