First Impression of Epson 4990

[paul stimac]

Morey and David,

Thanks for your posts. I need a cheap scanner that can scan 8x10's and I've been going back and forth between the epson 4990 and microtek i900. Because of your input I'm heading down to compusa to buy the epson.

[Morey Kitzman]

Paul

There are some 10% coupons out there off a single purchase. I received one in the mail about a week ago. You might want to look around. I think you'll be as surprised as I was. Good luck.

David

If you are using multisampling on the 4990, please tell me how. This option is missing in my software, as far I can tell. Thanks.

[Ken Lee]

Any sample images online ?

[Morey Kitzman]

Ken

Where can I post some sample shots?

[David Roossien]

Scott Fleming: I didn't say unsharp, I said "less sharp" and was comparing the 2nd scan to the 1st scan. I wouldn't start jumping to conclusions about this scanner based on my first 2 scans or general statements here. The 2 scans weren't even apples to apples. I agree with Morey's initial impression that the scanner doesn't seem to need multisampling to produce good results when he said

"The 4990 no longer using multisampling, you just don't need it"

Morey: I bought the Pro version and was using Lasersoft AI. It has multisampling options of 1, 2, 4, 8 or 16. I'm not sure if the standard Lasersoft software has this option, but it would be interesting for others to know.

[Morey Kitzman]

David

Thanks for responding to my question on multisampling. It seems clear that the standard software version does not have this feature.

[Ken Lee]

Morey - If you send me a few JPG files, I can put them on my server on their own page.



For example, see here where I have a few comparisons between a dedicated Minolta scanner, and a Microtek ArtixScan 2500

[JM Woo]

Anyone have access to both a Microtek i900 and Espon 4990 for a head-to-head comparison?

[Daniel Geiger]

Morey,

you say that you put your Microtek Artix 1800f up for sale because of better shaddow performance of the Epson. The Epson 4990 has a Dmax of 4.0, whereas the Artix 1800f has a Dmax of 4.8. The Microtec scanner is close to an order of magnitude better, or roughly 3 f-stops better. Resolution is lower in the Microtec, so I wonder what you are seeing. Do you scan color or B&W? Or are advertised Dmax values misleading?

I am in the market for a 4x5 scanner as well, for color transparencies; I thought that Dmax is more important the resolution. I have a Nikon Coolscan 4000ED (Dmax 4.2) for 35 mm slides, and shaddow performance could be better. Any learned opinions? Thanks.

[Morey Kitzman]

Daniel

It has me wondering as well. I purchased the 1800f when it first came out, was it improved at a later time? In any case between the 4990 and the 1800f there is no comparison as far as sharpness and dmax are concerned, the 4990 is far superior. I compared a scan from the imacon, the 1800f and the 4990. The 4990 is 99% as good as the Imacon, the 1800f is around 60% both in dmax and sharpness. This is all the more curious in so far as the 1800f involved 8x multisampling and the 4990 was a straight scan, both around 200 mb to match the imacon. A couple of months ago I tryed the 4870 and the scans are considerably inferior to the 4990. I wonder now what scans the 4990 would produce with multisampling. Cheers.