v700 for 35 & 120?

[Tuolumne]

Yes indeed, but THAT does not look like the results that I have been getting.

I am very intrigued to know what you guys are doing.

Where are you getting strips of ANR glass? How do you fit it into the Epson holder?

I wish to know about software and settings.
//Jan

see www.betterscanning.com

/T

 

[snip]

see www.betterscanning.com

/T

I am familiar with that website, but they don't sell 135 strips of ANR glass? Please do correct me if I'm wrong, I have been lusting after one of their 120 and 5x4 holders for some time. But like everyone else, money is tight for me at the moment.

//Jan

 

[snip]

Here are some more samples- although, like mentioned above, it hard to determine true quality from the web. I have the V700- which can be picked up for $350 if you watch for sales- and am quite happy with it. I only use it for the web and smallish prints.

The first is Delta 400 120, the second Fuji Superia 35mm. I am not a perfectionist so these scans were 'put 'em in and turn on the machine' type scans. Not bad results, really. I have since played around a lot more with holder heights, etc.

nice scans, definately.

I must get around to playing more with my V750, I have the Epson supplied Fluid mount holder and fluid and all that, but I have mostly used that with 5x4

//Jan

 

[snip]

I am familiar with that website, but they don't sell 135 strips of ANR glass? Please do correct me if I'm wrong, I have been lusting after one of their 120 and 5x4 holders for some time. But like everyone else, money is tight for me at the moment.

//Jan

gargh, I have just corrected myself

//Jan

 

[stephaneb]

To make a seemingly complex subject simple, I will only say this: I have never seen sharp grain from any kind of film scanned on my Epson V750 - with holders or without, at any resolution. I DO see sharp grain instead from my Nikon film scanner. This is precisely the point to aim for: grain sharp scans - the rest is secondary, although a good Dmax helps too.

OK, you use a $2,000 scanner and explain it is better than a $600 one. Duh! It ought to be! The samples posted here show that to correctly advise the original poster, we need to know what output format he targets.

I explain on my blog how I get great scan from 35mm with the Epson. They are good enough for critical 10x15" prints and 12x18" murals. I never tried larger because I don't have a larger printer. Nor a castle-like appartment, so I don't have the walls to display larger either. And anyway, if I regularly needed larger, I'd consider medium format.

The usable resolution coming from a Coolscan and an Epson V750 are not all that different on print. For screen display there is no difference at all.

All my reasoning is for B&W silver film. I would expect the Coolscan to make a bigger difference with slides.

 

[EliasK]

I am very satisfied with the V700.
It is important to make tests with the height adjusters to have sharp results. I believe that each individual V700 scanner focus differently, so each user should make its own tests to find the best setting for the adjusters.
Sharp grain is clearly visible in my V700 scans:

i don't know how it looks on the web but in my monitor I see sharp grain.
this is a 100% crop from this shot scanned at 3200:

Tmax 400/Rodinal/FM2/Tamron SP 80-200/2.8

 

[noci]

that last batch of examples is really good, wow. considering what I have now, the v700 would probably be a good choice, it's beginning to dawn on me - thanks to the lively discussion. in terms of output size, more than a3 or a2 wouldn't be printed by me personally anyways, but having the option to take it further is always a good thing.

.. and also, then - the stuff I do doesn't merit outright snobbism. maybe somebody else's here does, uh huh yeah.. ;} but that's a common occurence in many threads pertaining to scanning 120.. *yawn*.. get over it.