Very pleased with the V700

[Mudman]

I'm late to the party on this, but I'm super pleased with the Epson V700 when used with Vuescan. I'm using the pixel binning method to go from 6400 to 3200 dpi, and it looks phenomenal.

Contax IIa with Nikkor 35mm f2.5 @ f5.6, Ilford Delta 100

100% Crop

Unfortunately the 100% crop seems to be degraded by hosting on Google's picasa. In Photoshop, I can read very clearly all of the text. I'm impressed. I had originally only planned on using it with MF film, but with results like this it may put my Coolscan IV to rest.

 

[froyd]

Wonderful results.

I have a Coolscan IV but I've long suspected that a V700 would be sufficient for my needs AND take care of my 120 negs as well.

Did you use the standard Epson holders?


PS - Could I ask you to send me a full resolution file of the image in your post?

 

[Mudman]

Yes, standard holders set to 3.5mm and yes, send me your email address.

EDIT: The one spot that the scanner didn't work well with was mounted slides. The Coolscan knocked it out of the park in comparison. I think the mount must have changed the focus point compared to the standard negative holders.

 

[gbealnz]

Mud.
You have me thinking now. I desperately want to get a decent scanner, I am back onto film, and up until now making do with a camera and copy system. It works, but is labour intensive.
You are THAT happy with the V700? The reason I ask is that I always assumed the dedicated film scanner, like the Plustek/Nikon/Minolta/etc was the best way to go. Your shot above though does look good.
I'll take a look at the full res version too if you could please. g.beal (at) xnet.co.nz
Gary

 

[Mudman]

I think it depends on the size you want to print. The v700 compares very favorably with my coolscan iv which is 2900 dpi. The iv is better, but the v700 allows to pop in 24 shots and walk away. Compared to a modern 35mm scanner at 4000 dpi or more, it doesn't hold up. I mainly bought it for MF film; the fact that I can get decent scans similar to my iv is an unexpected bonus. I'd love a 9000 or the new plustek 120 (if I could get one with no bugs) but I paid $415 shipped from epson for the v700. The difference in quality isn't great enough for me in what I print (12x18 or smaller most of the time).

 

[gbealnz]

Appreciated.
I'm more thinking web etc. If I print, I'll likely "print" the old way, wet.
Gary

 

[bobby_novatron]

I owned a Nikon 9000ED for a while -- and the scans were stunning. But I hated the Nikon software, and the lack of Nikon support for any modern operating systems made using the software clunky.

VueScan and the Nikon didn't work much better for me. Slow and tedious.

I sold the Nikon and bought an Epson v700 and have been happy ever since. The Epson is an excellent machine for the price. Yes, a dedicated film scanner would do a better job, but there's a significant price premium for that.

Once I got the hang of the Epson software I found it very simple to use and quite flexible. I love being able to use the dedicated film holder and just "set it and forget it". I go through the thumbnails, adjust any settings (if needed), and press OK. The scanner happily hums along, and a short time later the scans are ready. Easy!

My only complaints are that the Epson film holders aren't as good as the Nikon's. The Epson holders can have problems holding film that isn't completely flat, or has dried with a bit of curl. And sometimes the Epson software doesn't produce proper medium format thumbnails -- it seems to get confused and can't decide if my film is 6x6 or 6x7, even with the proper settings.

Small complaints, really. I've used my Epson v700 so much I think it has paid for itself a hundred times over. 🙂

Just for fun, here's a sample image. Olympus OM4Ti with Lomography 100 ISO film. Epson v700 scan.

 

[Mudman]

Appreciated.
I'm more thinking web etc. If I print, I'll likely "print" the old way, wet.
Gary

Gary for web it's a no brainer.

 

[photomoof]

Thanks for posting.

I have seriously been considering the Epson, the results look great. I want to replace my aging Minolta.

My feeling is that I would have a drum scan made for exhibition anyway.

 

[gbealnz]

Thank you all. It has helped heaps, and then not at all, LOL.
While talking the Epsons, what about the likes of the V550, and or the Canon CS9000F Mk2? Any good?
A wanted advert has turned up a Minolta Dimage 5200, so I am doing some research.
Gary

 

[jwicaksana]

I'm late to the party on this, but I'm super pleased with the Epson V700 when used with Vuescan. I'm using the pixel binning method to go from 6400 to 3200 dpi, and it looks phenomenal.

Contax IIa with Nikkor 35mm f2.5 @ f5.6, Ilford Delta 100

100% Crop

Unfortunately the 100% crop seems to be degraded by hosting on Google's picasa. In Photoshop, I can read very clearly all of the text. I'm impressed. I had originally only planned on using it with MF film, but with results like this it may put my Coolscan IV to rest.

That is really impressive. Can you tell us about pixel binning method? I'd like to try it on my Canoscan 9000f 😉 thanks.

 

[Mudman]

Thank you all. It has helped heaps, and then not at all, LOL.
While talking the Epsons, what about the likes of the V550, and or the Canon CS9000F Mk2? Any good?
A wanted advert has turned up a Minolta Dimage 5200, so I am doing some research.
Gary

I have the v500, and I'm not a fan. The iv knocks it out of the park for 35mm, and you start seeing degradation in MF by 12x12. Maybe I got a bad copy.

Re: pixel binning. In vuescan set the jpeg or raw or tif output sampling to 2 instead of one. It scans at 6400 dpi, but interpolates down to 3200. It gives a cleaner and sharper file.

 

[gbealnz]

I have the v500, and I'm not a fan. The iv knocks it out of the park for 35mm, and you start seeing degradation in MF by 12x12. Maybe I got a bad copy.

Help me out here please.
The "IV"? You mean the V600? I am teetering.
Thanks
Gary

 

[Keith]

I have a V700 that is several years old with tens of thousands of scans under it's belt ... it's been faultless within it's capabilities.

My one criticism .... the glass is a nightmare to keep clean. I've had the thing apart about three times to remove the haze that constantly builds up on the inside surface!

 

[btgc]

I've had the thing apart about three times to remove the haze that constantly builds up on the inside surface!

Wipers from car headlights would be of help 🙂

Haze on glass, dust on sensors, corrupted files, fogged film....oh well. Creator dearly loves us photographers.

 

[Mudman]

Help me out here please.
The "IV"? You mean the V600? I am teetering.
Thanks
Gary

Sorry, the nikon coolscan iv I own.

 

[whitecat]

I always has good results from the 700 but when I bought the glass inserts to keep the film flat, the results were even better.

 

[Argenticien]

My one criticism .... the glass is a nightmare to keep clean. I've had the thing apart about three times to remove the haze that constantly builds up on the inside surface!

I've noticed that haze. I've never cleaned it, as my scanner is fairly new and this is the first time it's reaching a point where it is visible. Is the disassembly and cleaning difficult and is it documented anywhere? (Apols if in the manual -- I don't have it with me now.) I'd be concerned that I might irreparably decalibrate something in there.
--Dave

 

[ABrosig]

Re: pixel binning. In vuescan set the jpeg or raw or tif output sampling to 2 instead of one. It scans at 6400 dpi, but interpolates down to 3200. It gives a cleaner and sharper file.

I've had strange problems increasing the scan number in vuescan on a pacific image pf120 pro. About half the time or more I get doubled images, almost as if the scanner is shifting horizontally on the image for the second scan. Is this just me, is it the scanner or am I nuts? Thanks

 

[Keith]

I've noticed that haze. I've never cleaned it, as my scanner is fairly new and this is the first time it's reaching a point where it is visible. Is the disassembly and cleaning difficult and is it documented anywhere? (Apols if in the manual -- I don't have it with me now.) I'd be concerned that I might irreparably decalibrate something in there.
--Dave

Hi Dave,

When I needed to dismantle mine I went on a google search and eventually found a tutorial ... not too hard luckily and it only involves removing the top section and then undoing four screws on the top of the lower section which are hidden under four little plastic caps from memory. Getting those caps out was a bit of a trick though!