epson 750 for 8 by 10 and 35mm?

**Brad Rippe** · 10-Dec-2007, 18:28

I'm considering getting an Epson 750 for 4 by 5 and 8 by 10 negatives. Will this scanner also produce satisfactory scans for 35mm and 2-1/4? I'd like to make mostly 11 by 14, and possibly 16 by 20 prints from the smaller formats.
Thanks for any advice.

-Brad

**Ted Harris** · 10-Dec-2007, 18:39

Simple answer is no. It will do a marginal job on MF and even less satisfactory for 35mm.

**Brad Rippe** · 10-Dec-2007, 18:40

Thanks Ted, I sort of figured that was the case. Is there a smaller format scanner you'd recommend?

**Walter Calahan** · 10-Dec-2007, 20:46

Nope, use a film scanner, such as a Nikon Coolscan 5000 for 35mm, or 9000 for 35mm and medium format.

**Armin Seeholzer** · 11-Dec-2007, 03:10

Hi Brad

For me it work's from 35mm up to 8x10 and from 6x6 and 6x7 up to 11x14 inches!

But I know not every scanner is similar good and not everyone has the same standards.

You have to test it for yourself, Armin

**Greg Lockrey** · 11-Dec-2007, 03:33

With 35mm there is a little noise associated with the scan and is noticable in flat areas like a sky on an 11x14". Some people could confuse that noise with film grain. It would depend on your sensibilities. Larger film like 2 1/4" looks pretty good at 13x19" and I find that the 4x5" looks good to 16x20". I haven't tried any 8x10" film however. But then I don't look at my prints with 10x loops either, my eyes are 60 years old and I wear glasses.

For around $750 the Epson is a good deal. To get significantly better, then you have to pay $2000.00 on up for a dedicated film scanner like the Nikon 9000. Or $5k for a used high end flat bed. Just depends on your present need and pocket book.

**ifer** · 11-Dec-2007, 03:42

thought of using this scanner for my 4x5 trans for 40x50 inches output.
can i?

**Greg Lockrey** · 11-Dec-2007, 03:53

Originally Posted by ifer

thought of using this scanner for my 4x5 trans for 40x50 inches output.
can i?

The concensus is that only a 2050 ppi scan is capable with this scanner due to the resolution limitation of the lens. If that's the case then your 40x50" would be 200 ppi which is a low end visual tolarance. Most of the "high end" guys say that 3-4 times enlargment is the limit with this scanner putting it somewhere around a 12x15" to 16x20". I'm not so fussy and have been happy with 30x40" prints that I have done with it.

**audioexcels** · 11-Dec-2007, 22:52

http://flickr.com/photos/bennehboy/tags/6008i/

The shots of the boys doing the backflips and whatnot made it into a magazine.

All done with a V700...120 film-6cmX6cm

**Lenny Eiger** · 11-Dec-2007, 23:14

Originally Posted by Greg Lockrey

The concensus is that only a 2050 ppi scan is capable with this scanner due to the resolution limitation of the lens. If that's the case then your 40x50" would be 200 ppi which is a low end visual tolarance. Most of the "high end" guys say that 3-4 times enlargment is the limit with this scanner putting it somewhere around a 12x15" to 16x20". I'm not so fussy and have been happy with 30x40" prints that I have done with it.

A couple of things. First, it's slightly less than that, if only to account for the edges. I generally agree with your numbers tho' I'd say just under 200 in real life, with no real cropping.

You last sentence is very important to this discussion however. The "I'm not so fussy" is crucial. I have said a lot of things about quality and when comparing things it might be useful. However, I am very fussy about my print quality because I consider it a major part of my aesthetic. This is not true for everyone and there's no rule that says it has to be.

I think if you are fine with prints that are ok, it's fine to use a color printer to do black and white, and its ok to use a flatbed scanner. If you want the absolute best quality, however, the drum and dedicated black and white printers is the way to go. I think one has to be honest with themselves about how important the quality of a print needs to be, or it can cost you and lot of money and time learning how to use these tools. I happen to love it. I was taught that you use the best tool for the job and its been a strategy that has worked for me. If you find yourself looking at prints by Frederick Evans, Sutcliffe or looking over the CameraqWork gravures - and drooling, then you likely will be needing some black and white inks... but it isn't for everyone...

Lenny