scanner...again

[Percy]

Hi.
Just wanted to let those who might be interested in scanning lf but can't decide on a scanner:

the Epson 4990 is great! The Microtek 1800f I had wend bad after just a few scans, was heavy, more than twice the price of the Epson, and, to boot, one of the 4x5 holders was warped (right out of the box!). This caused me to ruin quite a few films before figuring out it was not just me. Perhaps I just got a bad one.

Since, however, the convential wisdom, as it were, seems to prefer the 1800f over the Epson, I thought I might spread the word: don't believe without trying for yourself. The 4990 is almost as good as the Nikon 9000 with 6x6...I still am having a hard time believing I am getting such great scans, especially with 4x5 and up. Oh, and the color seems to be dead on--with no tweaking involved!

Amazing.

[Frank Petronio]

I tried two 1800fs, both of which were broken out of the box.

Maybe the 4990 isn't as good but it actually works.

[Percy]

Interesting, Frank. Some guy, apparently in customer service, insisted that the problems I had, e.g. streaks in scans, were very uncommon, and that the 1800f was a "professional machine".
In my opinon, not only does the 4990 actually work--it works better. Much better.

[neil poulsen]

You may want to wait until you can get an Epson V700, or the V750M. There's another thread on this new scanner.

Review of V700: http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20V700/page_8.htm

Previous Thread: http://largeformatphotography.info/lfforum/topic/505313.html

Pretty impressive performance, based on the review.

One thing that's interesting is the difference it makes to use the supplied height adjusters. Makes me wonder if adjusting the height of the film holders using tape would improve the performance of the 4990 or the 4870. I'll give it a try on my 4870. Hadn't thought to try that before now. Sometimes I need to be broadsided before thinking of relatively simple ideas. Oh, gosh.

[John Flavell]

Vincent Oliver's tests are very useful. Am I wrong in thinking the V750M is the pro version? After looking at his tests of the V700, I can't wait to see what the V750M will do.

One thing I like about Epson putting these out in Europe first is people like Vincent take so much time playing with them before the American release. We do get an enormous amount of information before making decisions.

[Jay W]

Quite a while ago, I tried playing with height adjustment with my 2450 since I had heard height was a factor in sharpness. I wasn't able to tell much difference with my testing method. (A stack of microscope slides glued together in a spiral, with scratches on each slide.) If you search around, I think folks have found that each of the scanners (2450 - 4990) have all been image height sensitive. The question is, was your factory height the sharpest.

[Frank Petronio]

I've gathered from these forums that getting a good scanner is a bit of a crapshoot. Some people get them with everything aligned and the height seems to be right, while some others are less fortunate. When you see how cheaply they are made you can understand why -- my older $3600 Agfa Arcus was built like a tank -- but a $400 Epson replaced it because ulimately it performed better (and I was lucky).

[QT Luong]

Agree with Frank. They are after all prosumer products, which just means consumer products.
On a related note, if you test with technical methods various samples of
Canon L lenses, you will find a surprising sample-to-sample variation.