Scan with my amazin lightbox and a normal scanner

[bizarrius]

HP Scanjet G4050 is a better choice than V500 as it makes 4x5 directly.

IMHO Scanjet G4050 inferior than V800.

Scanjet G4050 had a measured density range of 2.87D and a measured optical resolution of 1000-1300dpi. (hardware resolution doesn't matter a lot)

V800 will deliver true optical 2300-2800 dpi depending on the direction, and using multiexposure software feature (purchased apart in the V800 case, not with V850) the Epson will go well further in deep densities, useful for provia/velvia.

Portra is very easy to scan, and with 4x5 you'll have more pixels than you may need. Portra was reengineered long ago to be easily scanned in digital minilabs.

I think that for the moment a used G4050 can be a very good choice for you. I you are to buy it new better to go to the V800, that will be your target in the future.

Thank you very much for all your help i will probably go for a used G4050 until i see what i can do for an epson V800 +
how about the canon 9000? it doesn't cover the whole surface either right? which are my options in general?

Demetris,

Do you have a digital camera? If so, which one?

As i mentioned before, the only digital camera i have is the iphone7. i might be able to borrow some canon from a friend or something but that isn't a solution and i would nevr buy a DSLR just to scan my negatives :/

[Peter De Smidt]

Right. Sorry that I missed that.

[Jim Jones]

Many years ago I tried scanning negatives on a cheap flatbed with an improvised diffused light source, and the results were very poor. I knew it would have helped to disable the internal light source, but not help enough.

[Peter De Smidt]

I used a Canon 9950, if I remember rightly, quite awhile ago. It was on par with the Epsons of the time.

[Pere Casals]

Thank you very much for all your help i will probably go for a used G4050 until i see what i can do for an epson V800 +
how about the canon 9000? it doesn't cover the whole surface either right? which are my options in general?

Anyway a used G4050 is for 25€ in Barcelona (Wallapop listed)




The Canon 9000 is also for 120, no 4x5, back illuminator has some 6cm


You even can buy a Ryanair air ticket and spend a weekend to shot Sagrada Familia cathedral

[bizarrius]

Theres a G4050 for sale on ebay for 80 euros inc shipping that is refurbished but i still don't know if i can trust a scanner sale on the internet. these things are sensitive.
also how would i be able to buy that from wallapop if i wanted? isn't that local sales only?

thanks

[Pere Casals]

Theres a G4050 for sale on ebay for 80 euros inc shipping that is refurbished but i still don't know if i can trust a scanner sale on the internet. these things are sensitive.
also how would i be able to buy that from wallapop if i wanted? isn't that local sales only?

thanks

The Wallapop €25 offer is mostly intended to local market, pick and go. Often sellers are not prepared to ship that, one should ask them.


Ebay has important advantages. READ very well ALL, twice or three times. Consider positive votes of the seller, 99,6% (or 98%) to 100% of positives is what you need, read very well what other customers say of the seller.

A neutral or a negative vote is very painful for a seller that needs to mantain reputation, see what happened with negative votes, how the seller reacted, and if the negative is justified or not.

If you pay with Paypal the payment to the seller is delayed some weeks, in case you are not satisfied you can retain the payment until the problem is arranged.


If the unit you were considering is the Poland's one, it has 14 days return policy, so you can return it if you don't like it, and seller has fair 100% customer satisfaction, so you only risk shipping.

IMHO, go for it... and enjoy !


Here you have a G4050 Flickr group https://www.flickr.com/groups/1296476@N24/pool/

[Pere Casals]

I used a Canon 9950, if I remember rightly, quite awhile ago. It was on par with the Epsons of the time.

Hello Peter,

Canon 9950, it is on par with some lower Epsons of the time, but IMHO very far from V700 range, or from its direct predecessor. Still a good scanninst can have very good results with it, sure, for example with MF/LF color negative film that's intrinsically lowres and easy to scan because big color clouds by film engineering, and moderate density. Also MF/LF size makes optical performance less a concern for common enlargements.

IMHO 9950 would be less suitable for 135, in special for some films. (like G4050)

Regards.

[Peter De Smidt]

Regarding 35mm, it depends on what you're scanning. With grainy film, the 9950 was significantly better than a Nikon Coolscan V. With fine grain film the Nikon easily out-performed the Canon. I had both. The V700 is much newer than a 9950.

[Pere Casals]

Regarding 35mm, it depends on what you're scanning. With grainy film, the 9950 was significantly better than a Nikon Coolscan V. With fine grain film the Nikon easily out-performed the Canon. I had both. The V700 is much newer than a 9950.

Well, IMHO "better" a bit may also depend on what one wants, in LF grain is mostly a nuisance, while with MF/135 for some it is a major aesthetic tool, for some it's also nuisance. Also film grain depends a lot on how Photoshop is used. JPEG + bad image resize habits can destroy all.

IMHO we can do both, we can sharpen grain in PS (using proper sharpening radius) or we can defocus grain. To me a bit like in the old times: developer solvent effect could be substituted by slight defocus in enlarger. In color print film IMHO the negative sampling density of Frontiers is near the ideal one. Color negative film was reengineered to perform optimally with standard digital minilabs, rather than with enlargers.

The V700 is much newer than a 9950.

The V700 is c. 2006, just when C9950 was to be discontinued I think, by Canon 9950 era there was the Epson 4990, that's somewhat close to V700 performance. http://www.kenrockwell.com/epson/4990.htm