Was out looking at compters locally the other day and noticed that the Hewlett Packard 4890 flatbed scanner could do large format film (H.P. recommends it for up to 4x5, but the backlighted scanning area is large enough for 8x10). Has anyone used this machine? Does it do a reasonable job on negatives and slides? The price is certainly attractive in my area.
Vick, I haven't used it and can recall seeing no discussion of this scanner for lf film work. I am always skeptical of something that costs less than half as much as the competition as is the case with the HP 4890 inclkuding the 100 rebate. OTOH, who knows ... it could be as good as the Epson 4990 or Microtek i800 but it seems to me that, unless someone can chime in here with some actual results, you would be better stepping up to one of the tried and proven alternatives.
The reviews have said that it is very bad for negatives.
Hi GB -- hope I'm not too late jumping on this thread but I own and use the HP 4870 scanner for BW 4x5 negs and it does a wonderful job. It takes some work and I would be willing to help you with that but once mastered it will be a great scanner.
I have used it for 35mm and it is...."ok". I would probably use a dedicated film scanner if I was serious about smaller format work instead. It is no drum scanner by any means. But, I would bet you can't tell the difference between this scanner and a drum scanner from 4x5 negs in a print up to 24". I have printed up to this point and see no difference between the same image at 8x10 or 24x32. I'm not positive but I would guess much above this size and the limitations of the scanner will come into play.
The scanner has always been the weak link in the film-to-digital process but it is getting better. If cost is a concern I promise you won't be disappointed with the 4870 but if you have the money and still not fond of sending negs out for drum scanning then take a look at the new Epson V750--looks very promising.
Hope this helps.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks