Any "full frame" 8x10 film flatbed scanners exist?

I have an interest in scanning 8x10 black and white film, and recently I had the opportunity to testdrive the Microtek i900 scanner. I only had a few hours with it, and although I found the scan quality to be quite good with the stock options, I found it frustrating that the scan head just about covered 8x10. And when you place the film on the glass tray, you're forced to use the peel-of vinyl tabs to keep the film flat. In the end, you wind up with a practical maximum film scan size of somewhere closer to 7.75 x 10. This is worse if your film has any signficiant curl, because in those cases you'll have to place vinyl tabs at multiple corners, further encroaching on the live image.

Before making a purchase decision, I'm hoping someone on this forum knows of a scanner with comparable specs to the Microtek that allows for a "full frame" 8x10 scan.The ideal scanner would have a scan head that reached 8x11 or more, which would give you ample space to lay the negative flat and crop the preview scan to the final 8x10 film dimension (i.e. all the way to the border). Any help s greatly appreciated. Happy holidays!

JM, I have used a Microtek 1800f for the last year to scan 8x10. This is my procedure to get decent scans:

- Replace the glass in the glass tray with antireflex-coated glass from a framing store. This will minimize the appearance of newton rings.

- Use 1/2" black tape to mask off an area on the glass so the 8x10 sheet will just fit. I got "photographic tape" at an art supplies store in the U.S.

- use 1/4" black tape to tape the edges of the sheet down, to keep the film flat.

Following this procedure I get consistently decent results. There is still a problem with noise in dark areas - tha 1800f is supposed to have a cooling device but I doubt it. For dark scans I simply remove the top of the scanner casing and let it sit for half an hour to cool off, then scan in an otherwise dark room. This will of course void the warraty of the scanner but these CCD flatbeds have so much heat-generated dark current noise that I find all flatbed I have tried to be unusable for dark images unless something is done to dissipate the heat.

it appears that the new epson perfection 4990 should be fine ... for only 600$.

Agfa Duoscan T1200 has an 8 1/4 X 10 1/4 transparency drawer as well as a standard scanner bed, cost about $300 or less in good shape.

CP Goerz

I have a Microtek ScanMaker 8700, and it will scan 8"x10" with the rebate without any issues. I frequently scan both 4x5 and 8x10 in this way, and the only issue is sometimes the exposure changes when you increase the scan-size to include the rebate - using VueScan makes this less of an issue (I found the Microtec scanning software pretty frustrating).

Epson 10000XL.

I hae been using the Microtek i900 for the past 4 months to scan 4x5 and 8x10. Theh i900, like the 1800f is a dual bed scanner meaning that there is no glass between the transparancy and the scanning optics/light source. For 8x10s the negative or transparancy does rest on a glass tray for support .. support only.

Do all you 8x10 scanners print incredibly large, like 50x60? Otherwise, I repeat my question of earlier threads, why scan 8x10 at all? The advantages of sticking with 4x5 seem overwhelming, IMHO, unless one prefers the experience of shooting with the larger camera, or one chooses to contact print. Plenty of resolution for reasonably sized prints, say up to 16x20, plus you get to use ReadyLoads.

"Do all you 8x10 scanners print incredibly large, like 50x60? Otherwise, I
repeat my question of earlier threads, why scan 8x10 at all? The
advantages of sticking with 4x5 seem overwhelming, IMHO, unless one
prefers the experience of shooting with the larger camera, or one chooses
to contact print. Plenty of resolution for reasonably sized prints, say
up to 16x20, plus you get to use ReadyLoads."

CXC

I'll repeat the answer you were given by others - there is a noticable difference from prints from 4x5 and 8x10 even at 16x20 and certainly by the time you get to 20x24

It's just a different look (not all down to the negative size, but mostly so), but the difference is there.

(and yes, I also make decent sized pritns at times - 50" or 60")

CXC There are lots of people that work on 8x10 for the fun of it. Bigger ground glass is incredibly better for framing and focusing and you get 8x10 negatives you can contact print. By scanning you add a whole new world of possibilities that you already know, like making larger prints or larger digital negatives for contact printing. I think that is reaseon enough to want to shoot 8x10.
When I photograph, I never think of convenience and even if 4x5 if enough for large prints, I enjoy the pleasure of working with my 8x10.