Lower cost scanner for 4x5 slides

[trink408]

I'm looking for opinions/advice on a lower cost scanner that would work well for scanning velvia 4x5 slides and printing up to 11x14 images at home. I'm not sure how high quality the scanner has to be in order to print a nice image that size...

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

thanks

[Skorzen]

I picked up a used epson 3200 and it does pretty well. For slides ICE might be nice, you can find the 4990's for not too much I think (I do mostly B&W and ICE doesn't work on that).

[Jim Jones]

Skorzen is right. My Epson Perfection 2450 Photo has given years of good service in scanning 4x5 B&W negs. It's all that's need to work with an Epson 3800 printer.

[Ron Marshall]

Epson sometimes sells refurbished 4990s on its website:

http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/B...yes&oid=-13268

[elliotwr]

Since Epson's discontinuation of the 4990 I've found it increasingly difficult to find a lower cost scanner. The cheapest scanner Epson offers us now is the $500 V700. Hardly what I consider cheap, but that's just me. Try looking on Amazon or ebay for used 4900's or the Epson 3200. The 2450 should also be sufficient for 11x14 prints. Good luck!

[trink408]

Thanks for the replies guys!

I didn't realize the 4990s were discontinued until I tired finding one online, I noticed the newer epsons were either much more money, or pretty cheap.

I was reading some about the microtek i800 pro, but the reviews didn't look that positive...

[vinny]

This question comes up about once a week.
I purchased an epson 3200 several years ago when it was new and opinions of it were high. It's a good paperweight. It doesn't handle velvia very well that's for sure. Forget about sharpness. I replaced that with an imacon and the difference was very noticable all around. I began shooting 8x10 and needed something bigger so last year i picked up a screen drum scanner for less than the price of the epson. Results are identical to tango scans from west coast imaging. Sharpening will only get you so far. Shooting 4x5 seems a bit overkill when you throw mediocre scans in the middle of the process. Using a roll film back and using one of the nikon scanners would yield better results. Do plenty of research.

[Brian Ellis]

For 11x14 and smaller prints from 4x5 film a 4990 or 700/750 will do about 95% of what a drum scanner will do with most images. In other words, assuming operators of equal ability and prints 11x14 or smaller you wouldn't be able to see the difference between a print from those scanners and a print of the same image from a drum scan except with a side-by-side comparison and then the difference would be minimal, mostly a little more detail in a deep shadow area if there was detail there to begin with. At least that's been my experience with having drum scans made from negatives that I had previously scanned on my home scanner (a Heidelberg flat bed something or other back then, a 4990 now). Then again, maybe the operators of the drum scanners were incompetent. I'd much rather have a scan from a 700/750 operated by someone who's very good at what they're doing than a drum scan from someone who doesn't know what they're doing or doesn't care.

[Alan Davenport]

The Epson 2450 does a decent job for making up to 16x20 prints from 4x5 film. Any newer model should be better.

[Rider]

On advice of folks here, I got a refurb Epson 4990 from Epson's website. I have a 20x24 print on the wall that looks pretty darn nice.

For 11x14 and smaller prints from 4x5 film a 4990 or 700/750 will do about 95% of what a drum scanner will do with most images. In other words, assuming operators of equal ability and prints 11x14 or smaller you wouldn't be able to see the difference between a print from those scanners and a print of the same image from a drum scan except with a side-by-side comparison and then the difference would be minimal, mostly a little more detail in a deep shadow area if there was detail there to begin with. At least that's been my experience with having drum scans made from negatives that I had previously scanned on my home scanner (a Heidelberg flat bed something or other back then, a 4990 now). Then again, maybe the operators of the drum scanners were incompetent. I'd much rather have a scan from a 700/750 operated by someone who's very good at what they're doing than a drum scan from someone who doesn't know what they're doing or doesn't care.