Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: 3200 Epson Pro Scanner versus the Non Pro Version for LF

  1. #11

    3200 Epson Pro Scanner versus the Non Pro Version for LF

    Tuan, that Epson 4800 is actually called Perfection 4870 in western countries and GT-X700 in Japan. Don't ask me for the logic behind the naming... It will do 5x7", but it does not come with film holders for that format. The actual film scanning area is about 6x10.5".

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 1997
    Posts
    117

    3200 Epson Pro Scanner versus the Non Pro Version for LF

    In reading the info on the Microtek i900 it states that the scanner comes with Digital Ice Photo Print technology. Am I correct in assuming that this digital ice is meant only for prints and not for transparencies?

  3. #13
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    6,837

    3200 Epson Pro Scanner versus the Non Pro Version for LF

    Mark -

    Digital ICE reads the infra-red channel, on color slide/negative film, and compares it against the R, G, and B channels. This doesn't work well on B&W neagative film.

  4. #14
    Founder QT Luong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1997
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,197

    3200 Epson Pro Scanner versus the Non Pro Version for LF

    Andreas, thanks for the precision. Please keep us updated if you have any noise,dmax, or dynamic range comparisons in the future.

  5. #15

    3200 Epson Pro Scanner versus the Non Pro Version for LF

    Tuan, when I find the time I will do some more tests of the 4870. But until the market introduction of this scanner in the US I still have plenty of time, I think ;-)

  6. #16

    3200 Epson Pro Scanner versus the Non Pro Version for LF

    My vote, assuming you have decided on the 3200, is the pro version unless you can buy Silverfast separately cheaper.

    Any scanner without the ability to calibrate itself, as the 3200 is not as it comes out of the box, is as useless as a guitar that cannot be tuned.

    Silverfast provides calibration capability so I am unclear on the value of the Monaco EZcolor Software unless it is also a monitor calibration which I doubt, but the IT8 Targets (assuming it includes the more expensive film target) are indispensable to calibrating.

    Vuescan is clunky and difficult to use. The full version will allow calibration but I much preferred the results from Silverfast. Silverfast has a great deal of automation if you trust it to make decisions while you're learning to scan.

    Epson is not the only option for scanning 4x5 but it so much cheaper that it takes a perverse compulsiveness to buy any other at two to four or more times the cost. I bought one but I am always on the look out for a better one if the price it right.

    For me the bottom line, like so many LF issues, is how big are you going to print and will any mortal be able to see any difference at that size. Given the printers you're considering, the Epson will be fine. But you need control of the scanning and of the color results. VueScan didn't give me that easily or at all sometimes.
    John Hennessy

Similar Threads

  1. Bought new Epson F-3200 transparent scanner...
    By Bernard Languillier in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 23-Jan-2005, 15:13
  2. Epson F-3200 film scanner
    By Joe Hunt in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 22-Jan-2005, 12:25
  3. Epson F-3200
    By Eirik Berger in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 17-Dec-2004, 11:06
  4. Scanner lid for Epson 3200
    By Eric Rose in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 9-Jun-2004, 07:57
  5. Epson 4870 vs 3200
    By Mark Erickson in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 18-Mar-2004, 07:41

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •