current state of scanners for 4x5?

[Lightbender]

I shoot 4x5, and I have many problems getting my polaroid 45 scanner to work consistantly.

What are the current scanners available for 4x5 and how good are they?

THX

[Kirk Gittings]

Are you talking dedicated 4x5 film scanners? Try none are available new. You go basically from prosumer flatbeds to Imacons to highend drum and flatbeds.

What are you doing with the scans. How large are you printing etc.?

[Lightbender]

I meant in the 'prosumer' catagory of flatbeds.
Last I heard was the epson 4990.. but of course flatbeds have their limitations considering they are scanning a long distance though a plate of glass.. I was wondering if there was a new microtek or something similar that worked well for 4x5. or if the current crop of flatbeds had better quality.

[Ted Harris]

The new top-of-the-line from Epson is the v750. Microteck has announced, but not yet released, a new model, the M1. It's expected rollout is early May. The v750 is slightly,but noticably, better than the 4990 according to most users. OTOH, the differences between the bottom-of-the-line 'prosumer' models, the Microtek i800 and the v750 are small compared to the differences between any of this class and the highend scanners Kirk referenced.

[Eric Brody]

I am currently using a Microtek 1800f which gives me very good quality scans. I believe it is now discontinued but there may be a few around somewhere. Many on this forum consider it the best in the <$1,000 category. I have not done comparisons, I'd rather be out with my camera.

There is a new Microtek, the M1, due at some time in the near future. There is no telling if it will be revolutionary, but personally, I doubt it. I have friends who get good quality from the Epson 4990 and their newer scanners, the 700 and 750. I would love to be able to get something with the quality of my Nikon 9000 for 4x5.

Good luck.

Eric

[Ted Harris]

Addendum, just talked with the Microtek Product manager after the post and the rollout of the M1 has now slipped till the end of May/beginning of June.

Eric, the M1 will not be a replacement for the 1800f which is indeed discontinued. If a dealer has one in stock you may be able to get one from them but there are no more in the supply chain. The 1800f was discontinued because the CCD chip in the machine,which is unique to that machine, was no longer available at areasonable price.

[walter23]

I really like my V750, it resolves down to the grain and does a pretty good job with dynamic range (dense areas on negative film and overexposures are handled pretty well). By default velvia scans seem to have a slight magenta cast (I'm not sure about other slide films), but this is pretty easy to fix with film profiles and manual tweaking in silverfast.

I printed a 16x24 of an ektrachrome E100VS 35mm slide and it looks almost as sharp as what I'd get from a digital SLR (but the saturation and colour look really nice, better than anything I get with direct digital capture). I printed some slightly larger 4x5 scans and they are beautiful - a friend commented that the print quality is better than a lot of the stuff he sees in galleries.

Not that these reduced resolution images are that useful, but everything on this page was scanned with it (except for the latest two images which are from a digital SLR).

Here's a tricky scan of a 6x6 ektachrome slide that was really dark. Multipass scanning with silverfast did a GREAT job of reducing noise in the deep shadow areas - this looks almost exactly like the original slide which is very dark / underexposed like this.

Here's a nice B&W negative scan from a couple of weeks ago. I can provide detailed crops if you want, but at 2400 DPI scanning resolution I can resolve all the little bits of lichen on those rocks very well.

I've never had a high quality drum scan done for comparison, but if I had the prints that would warrant it I would have no problem scanning with this machine for up to ~30x40" printing for sale or public display. I find it reasonably easy to manage colour (except for the trickiest velvia slides, usually underexposed and/or with really deep reds which are out of my monitor's gamut).

[Ted Harris]

Walter, some very nice images but with all due respect if you tried printing either of the scans you showed us (or a scan of a 4x5) from the v750 at 30x40 I suspect you would be disappointed and/or whoever was going to buy the print would be disappointed. That size is just beyond the capability of the scanner for the best quality prints. Yes you can get usable prints but not prints that I would want on display or would try to sell.

[Frank Petronio]

You could say the same thing about people who do 30x40 inch prints from 35mm P3200 -- technically the print falls apart and suffers, etc.

But it can still look awesome on the wall. It really depends on whether your work is about texture and detail -- or something else.

A good printer/Photoshoper can take it and make something good from anything. A better scanner helps for sure but I wouldn't not shoot or do stuff simply because all you can afford is "only" and Epson scanner.

[Bruce Watson]

A good printer/Photoshoper can take it and make something good from anything. A better scanner helps for sure but I wouldn't not shoot or do stuff simply because all you can afford is "only" and Epson scanner.

Yes, true enough. And the kicker is, you can always scan film again with a better scanner if required later on.

That said, nearly everything that one does to the file after the scan degrades the image. Most changes are small, but quantifiable, and they add up. This is why so many people advise scanning and editing in 16 bit mode -- it gives the file some "head room." Some edits are so destructive as to render the file unusable (which is why you should always back up the original scan file).

My point is that final print quality is dependent on scan quality. One can make good or even very good prints from good scans. But excellent prints need an excellent scan.