V500 vs V700/750 comparisons

[steveo_mcg]

I always wondered if it would be possible to stick a big, powerful, light box on top of the scanner and hit go. I expect there are some interlocks to disable to convince the scanner the lid is shut.

 

[Woodsy]

I always wondered if it would be possible to stick a big, powerful, light box on top of the scanner and hit go. I expect there are some interlocks to disable to convince the scanner the lid is shut.

Nope! that'd be a feature that would no doubt add another 50% to the price!

I found this out the other month when I accidently opened the scanner lid on my V700. It continued uninterrupted and left only a big black bar on the resulting scan where the lid was not completely down.

 

[steveo_mcg]

Interesting. Probably have to keep the power output from the light box reasonable, might there be a risk of over exposing since the devices is expecting a fairly fixed light source?

 

[abbandon]

DRange is what matters Dmax is meaningless without it.

Yes I know a ken Rockwell link but his bit about scanner lies I mean specs is reasonably accurate.

Most table top drums achieve about 3.8 so don't be expecting any flatbed to achieve well much over 3 I'm afraid.

1 EPSON PERFECTION V700 USED SCANNER (No Box) £55.00

From a stocklist I get sent probably doesn't have the film holders.

 

[Woodsy]

The idea was to make it out of a matrix of ultra bright white LED's. I can characterise the output spectrum of my scanner here at work (In the lab) and then get LED's to match as closely as possible. Having characterised the output intensity as a function of angle to the center axis, I can calculate the separation of the LEDs themselves and then diffuse it through one or two diffusion layers. Their brightness can then be adjusted with simple analogue electronics to suite the negative. I don't really envisage using it for B&W, but certainly for certain neg films and slide.

 

[abbandon]

Ramping up the lamp might give you better Dmax but thats no guarantee of better Drange

Density range is calculated by subtracting the Dmin, or minimum density at which detail can be distinguished, from the Dmax. Dmax numbers are often inflated by cranking up the exposure so high that highlight detail is burned out (which would be represented by a much higher than normal Dmin). But it's hard to find a range rating from a scanner manufacturer, even when they underwrite independent tests. A report Epson sponsored by the independent testing organization NSTL noted, "Epson Perfection V700 Photo was tested at both 6400 dpi and 4800 dpi resolutions. This scanner yielded consistent OD (maximum optical density) values for each scan at both the resolutions. The SNR (signal to noise) values for all the scanned images for Epson Perfection V700 Photo scanner were found to be greater than one. NSTL observes from these measurements that the average maximum OD value for this scanner is greater than 4.0." Nothing there about density range.

 

[Woodsy]

Ramping up the lamp might give you better Dmax but thats no guarantee of better Drange

I know, that's why it's an experiment, not a statement of results yet untaken

 

[robhooley167]

I think I'd best leave you two to it...

 

[excalibur2]

****my question, if it's not obvious is: does anyone think I should cancel my V500 order for a V700 under the cirumstances described? __________________****

It's all the law of diminishing returns for your money from a V500 to a V750pro and think, for negs, a flatbed scanner is only good for medium format and up, so you should be ok for 120 film with the V500.

This what you need:-
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Fuji-SP-3...197?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item565a0ea72d

or better still:-
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Fuji-Fron...room_Processing_Equipment&hash=item3f298aac8b

 

[osh]

Not sure about resurrecting this ancient thread, but the TP software did suggest it! The original thread seems to have morphed into the start of the failed scan comparison thread, but my question is back to the original point.

I have an order in for a V500, for my nascent venture into 120, and also for the large box of 6*9 negs and slides from my Dad's box of treasures. I had decided that I didn't need to spend the extra on a V700 as I wasn't expecting to go for LF for sometime (and if I do, I could sell the V500). And a V700 is more than double a V7500...

But we have recently had these issues about density of transparencies, particularly Velvia. Now, I don't understand the technical details, but I did notice that the V500 has a Dmax of 3.4 while the V700 has a Dmax of 4.0. Does that mean that the V700 would be significantly better at digging out that shadow detail in transparencies than the V500? Sufficiently better as in worth an extra £200 or so?

I guess the other option is to use the V500, then send my most favourite transparencies to someone with a drum scanner (we'll be in trouble with the mods if we debate some of the possible responses to that!). But that's a similar approach to my current plan for >A4 printing; I'm awaiting my first test A3 prints from Peak with eager anticipation!

EDIT: my question, if it's not obvious is: does anyone think I should cancel my V500 order for a V700 under the cirumstances described?

All my transparencies have been scanned with a V500 Chris, and provided that the exposure is ok they turn out fine. I have also decided just to send my favourite ones to be scanned, either imacon or drum scanner. What gets me is that the dynamic range doesn't seem all that different, though the resolution is better.

With that in mind, I've decided to keep the V500 for general scanning for the web but to send transparencies off for professional scanning if I want them printed. I recently had some excellent scans done for £8 a transparency, so for the price difference between a V500 and a V700 you could have a load of scans done at a much higher quality than the V700. Hope that makes sense!

 

[robhooley167]

Unless you need the extra size of the V700 scanning bed, I doubt you'd be able to tell much between them for web uploads so as Osh says, keep the V500 and then spend some money on professional scans for when you need prints done.

 

[abbandon]

I think I'd best leave you two to it...

To me its a no brainer rather than trying to hack some piece of kit why bother when if you know what to look for you can pick up a drum scanner for less than the price of the V750 thats just going to better on resolution Drange etc



If I didn't already have a V750 anyway I'd have a try at the V700 I mentioned earlier for 55 + the dreaded might need holders but probably worth a go.

I found a service manual for the Fuji Frontier but I've never seen any real specs quoted for it, I would expect the results to be accepable but bear in mind they were designed for high through put with mini labs not as a professional scanner, in Fuji terms would be a Lanovia flatbed or a Celsis 6250 drum scanner

The Lanovia's seem to go for 500 odd at times and are highly regarded whereas people can't give the Celsis drum scanners away ..literally I would say that one will be on ebay for about forever.

 

[PMN]

To me its a no brainer rather than trying to hack some piece of kit why bother when if you know what to look for you can pick up a drum scanner for less than the price of the V750 thats just going to better on resolution Drange etc

Myself and Mr Hooley own a drum scanner, we had to fork lift it into place and build an office around it...

I need no convincing drum scanners are the best way of digitising images from film but they're large, heavy and to get the best out of them is a somewhat more drawn out process than simply throwing a bit of film on a flatbed and hitting 'go'. There's a reason why people send stuff to be professionally scanned, most people have neither the space to house one nor the time to dedicate to making a drum scanner a worthwhile thing to have.

 

[excalibur2]

Well the frontier can't be that bad:-

http://craig-stephen.co.uk/2012/10/fuji-frontier-or-noritsu-film-scans/

Probably why I prefer Asda scans to my V750pro....

 

[PMN]

I actually prefer the Noritsu scans personally, there's a lot more detail in the highlights and to my eyes the colours are better although I'm only viewing them on my MacBook Pro screen. Those settings on the Fuji will be tweakable for sure, but if they're straight from the lab as he says then I have quite a strong preference for the Noritsu scans.

Just for fun I might do some examples tomorrow from both the drum scanner and my V500. I've literally spent between 6 and 9 hours a day most days this month in the office throwing various kinds of film through the drum scanner getting to grips with it, I reckon it's about time to try some proper comparisons!

 

[abbandon]

I have three all heavier than the D4000 none of which required a fork lift or more than two people to handle them its all relative and about how used you are to handling things the most important thing with most of these machines is physically locking the scanning head down before they ae moved.

Depends on the scanner and the software how akward they are, the better Howtek's with DPL are pretty straight foward and I would say you would most likely get a better result quicker from one than a V750. I see people go through agonies and messing about with other holders and wet mounting on V750 for results they still are not happy with I know I have never truely been happy with the V750.

People have issues with Drum scanners if they do too little research or pick the wrong machine.

If I ever get the time I will try and put together some usefull info so its easer for people to think about what might work for them and which machines to avoid and why without having to deal with the might be helpfull might be a waste of time scanhiend



I made a deliberate choice that I wasn't interested in wet printing because of the space you would require for one for large format enlargers and the gear you would need to make large prints and while no drum scanner is exactly small the table top variety are not as impractable as people might think.



Edit the method of operation of the Frontier and the Noritsu is just inherantly better than a consumer flatbed for 35mmm it is likely to give a better result for sure over the V750


@ Paul which software are you using with the D4000 ?

 

[PMN]

I have three all heavier than the D4000 none of which required a fork lift or more than two people to handle them

You didn't see where we had to put it, carrying simply wasn't an option...

its all relative and about how used you are to handling things

I've spent 20 years moving rather heavy and very expensive live sound equipment around Europe by land and air so I'm pretty used to handling things.

Depends on the scanner and the software how akward they are, the better Howtek's with DPL are pretty straight foward and I would say you would most likely get a better result quicker from one than a V750.

We drive ours with DPL and it's pretty quick once the film is mounted but wet mounting is much more fiddly and time consuming than just throwing film in a flatbed, and I've found dry mounting to largely be a waste of time.

I still maintain drum scanners aren't convenient things for the vast majority of people to have, and they're certainly not devices you learn to get the best out of with an hour or two of fiddling. I'm sure most people would rather put that time and energy into taking photos rather than figuring out scanners. That said I absolutely love scanning but maybe I'm a bit weird...

-cue sarcastic comment from Hooley-

 

[excalibur2]

***Edit the method of operation of the Frontier and the Noritsu is just inherantly better than a consumer flatbed for 35mmm it is likely to give a better result for sure over the V750***

People complain about the low scan at Asda but the TRUE dpi from the V750 is low as well, the software can make the scan look better on high scans on the V750 by producing less pixel break up, but the detail stays the same as the Asda scan...of course IMO.

 

[abbandon]

We drive ours with DPL and it's pretty quick once the film is mounted but wet mounting is much more fiddly and time consuming than just throwing film in a flatbed, and I've found dry mounting to largely be a waste of time.

Do you have the mounting station ?

Personally I don't find it that esentail to wet mount on the drum of the Screen while it was much more important for the Howtek but either is way easier than messing about trying to wet mount on a V750 which is not even a sensible possibilty for 10x8 and if you want to lose the Newton Rings you are going to need a slab of specail glass that will set you back more than 100.

I see people leaping through hoops with the V750 trying to get the best out of it and not wanting to accept that it will never do what they hope.

Drum scanners are not easy but neither are they as impossible as many would make out and while they may not be for everyone more people should give them so serious thought.

 

[PMN]

Do you have the mounting station ?

Indeed we do.

Drum scanners aren't impossible; I'm hardly the smartest guy around so if I can learn to operate one with decent results then most people will pick it up given enough time, I just think for *most* people's purposes they're not as convenient as a flatbed.

That said I'm not sure I could go back to using my V500 in the same way, the difference between that and the D4000 is staggering!

 

[abbandon]

This leads to the debate of why do you still use film......

There are many different and valid answers to that question for me personally I don't see the point of shooting 35mm for most of the purposes that I would use 35mm for digitail is better by the time you get to the medium formats the cost of worth while digitail gear is beyond most amateur means and I do not shoot a lot of 120 as I find the results disapointing compared to the resolution and detail available from large format which is now more easilly affordable than at any time in the past, yes the film is expensive but you can't use any where near soo much of it. You will see the world and his wife recomend the V700 / V750 for large format (its bigger you don't need the resolution that you do for 35 or 120) but you'll notice that just about all those who are serious about it give up on trying to get the results they want from the Epsons and either use a scanning service or buy their own drum scanner or pro flatbed The critical recomendation for 35 or 120 is for the Nikon or Minolta scanners.

I would have to agree that if people have found a good minilab the develop and scan service makes a lot of sense if you are not looking for larger images.

If you want to scan your own work for the best results then you need to look beyond an Epson Flatbed its a workable solution but it is not ideal for anything it doesn't have the true resolution to pull the best from 35mm its Drange leaves a lot to be desired so its not ideal for transparency work and for large formats the film holders are not capable of holding the film truely flat. To get the best from them you need to wet mount which for starters bring the maxium film size it can handle down to 5x7 and if you read the manual in theory to bring in the higher quality lens you have to scan at the maxium resolution which will take as long as many drum scanners anyway assuming you haven't been driven mad by trying to lose the bubbles.

Now given that people accept the fact that shooting film is going to cost more than digitail but they want to be able to transfer their results into digitail form why would you put up with sub standard scans ?

Price paid for a V750 in 2008 was 549 if I recall correctly, the most recent drum scanner 250 buy it now off of ebay it did require some work but I got a useable result far quicker than from the V750.

 

[PMN]

This leads to the debate of why do you still use film......

There are many different and valid answers to that question for me personally I don't see the point of shooting 35mm for most of the purposes that I would use 35mm for digitail is better

It really depends how you define 'better' and what your aim is. To me photography is largely a form of communication rather than a technical exercise and for my purposes I get infinitely better looking black and white images from my OM20 or EOS 10 loaded with PanF or Acros than I ever would from my 5D2 or 7D. When I take photos my aim is generally to get across what I'm seeing or feeling at the time, the ability to zoom into 100% and see someone eating a sandwich 3 miles away isn't usually going to help me in doing that so ultimate resolution isn't high on my list of priorities, it's more about the character of the image. That isn't to say I don't appreciate technical quality - of course I do, but resolution isn't the only criteria some people perceive as 'quality'.

The vast majority of my images on the net are 1600 pixels wide, a 2000dpi scan of 35mm on the D4000 comes out at around 2700 wide which suits my Internet needs perfectly. If I need to do a print I'll just scan at 4000dpi which will easily pull out enough detail for what I need most of the time. Medium format obviously gives me more resolution which is great, but again that extra resolution isn't necessarily the thing that will make me take a photo on 120 rather than 35mm or digital; I can't even describe what that thing is, I just use whichever format feels right to me at the time.

Now given that people accept the fact that shooting film is going to cost more than digitail but they want to be able to transfer their results into digitail form why would you put up with sub standard scans ?

I was generally pretty happy with the results I was getting on the V500, I spent a lot of time learning how to make it work the way I wanted it to and actually I think it's a great scanner for the price. I never felt the results from it were "sub standard" because at the end of the day it's just a consumer scanner, it's unreasonable to expect it to perform like even an old pro unit. If I needed a serious scan doing before we acquired the D4000 I'd have sent it to be scanned professionally just like most others would.

 

[medwaygreen]

It really depends how you define 'better' and what your aim is. To me photography is largely a form of communication rather than a technical exercise and for my purposes I get infinitely better looking black and white images from my OM20 or EOS 10 loaded with PanF or Acros than I ever would from my 5D2 or 7D. When I take photos my aim is generally to get across what I'm seeing or feeling at the time, the ability to zoom into 100% and see someone eating a sandwich 3 miles away isn't usually going to help me in doing that so ultimate resolution isn't high on my list of priorities, it's more about the character of the image. That isn't to say I don't appreciate technical quality - of course I do, but resolution isn't the only criteria some people perceive as 'quality'.

The vast majority of my images on the net are 1600 pixels wide, a 2000dpi scan of 35mm on the D4000 comes out at around 2700 wide which suits my Internet needs perfectly. If I need to do a print I'll just scan at 4000dpi which will easily pull out enough detail for what I need most of the time. Medium format obviously gives me more resolution which is great, but again that extra resolution isn't necessarily the thing that will make me take a photo on 120 rather than 35mm or digital; I can't even describe what that thing is, I just use whichever format feels right to me at the time.



I was generally pretty happy with the results I was getting on the V500, I spent a lot of time learning how to make it work the way I wanted it to and actually I think it's a great scanner for the price. I never felt the results from it were "sub standard" because at the end of the day it's just a consumer scanner, it's unreasonable to expect it to perform like even an old pro unit. If I needed a serious scan doing before we acquired the D4000 I'd have sent it to be scanned professionally just like most others would.

That is a very balanced and if I may say beautiful reply, it conveys the essence of what us film gits really feel.

PS: Having said that I love my D200 with the wonderful 24-120 attached, to me it is a great combo.

 

[PMN]

Thanks Richard, that's very kind! I'm in a wordy mood this morning.

I know what you mean about the D200, I absolutely adore my 5D2 and my 7D's pretty damned nice as well. At the end of the day I don't love analogue or digital, I just love photography. If all I had to take photos was an iPhone I'm pretty sure I'd end up loving that too.

 

[medwaygreen]

Thanks Richard, that's very kind! I'm in a wordy mood this morning.

I know what you mean about the D200, I absolutely adore my 5D2 and my 7D's pretty damned nice as well. At the end of the day I don't love analogue or digital, I just love photography. If all I had to take photos was an iPhone I'm pretty sure I'd end up loving that too.

 

[ChrisR]

Just to say I decided not to buy a V700 (or a drum scanner), and picked up my V500 on Monday. First results are certainly adequate for my needs, but I won't be getting rid of the Plustek 7500i! The 35mm strip holders on the V500 look pretty hard to use other than with dead straight strips.

BTW, the 120 negatives I've handled so far seem to have rather less edge space than 35mm (relatively at least). I've got a feeling I need some cotton gloves for handling. Any suggestion where to get them? Would need to be asy off/on, I think...