cezanne 5300 scanner

[barrybest]

Hello,

I was hoping that someone could give me some advise!

I'm looking into buying a scanner for scanning my negatives,

What would be better a new epson v750 scanner or a used screen cezanne FT-S5000?

much apreciated,

barry

[Regular Rod]

If you are only going up to 4x5 then the Epson would be difficult to beat. The original, flimsy 4x5 holders are remarkably good and worth fiddling with the height above the platen glass to get the focus just right. Bigger than that you may be better with a drum scanner...

RR

[Lenny Eiger]

What do you want to do?

What aren't there more choices in there, maybe even a used drum scanner?

Lenny

[Peter De Smidt]

Are you scanning negatives, slides.... and for what use? A Cezanne can capture 5700 samples per inch, or a little higher, according to my hi-res target. That's about double the real resolution of the Epson. But if you don't need that .... The Cezanne is much larger, as in 5 foot wide, 180 lbs. It uses old software for old operating systems.

[barrybest]

I am looking to scan multiple formats, 35mm, 6x6, 4x5 en ulf glas negatives, both colour and bw,
it would great to get scans with a high dynamic range that are suitable for large digital printing,

A drum scanner is not a option because I would like to scan my glass negatives as well,
I think that the epson v750 is the best qualiy for its price range,

I can get a second hand cezanne for the same price as a new epson v750,
Thats why I limited my search for these 2 scanners, If anyone has other optons or idears always welcome,

Barry

[Peter De Smidt]

Service and parts for the Cezanne are very expensive, if they're available at all. As a result, the condition of the unit is very important, as are the included accessories and software. The Cezanne is a significantly better scanner than the Epson. You did see the part about it being 5 foot wide?

[barrybest]

He

I know that the scanner is very big, this isn't a problem, thanks for the advise,
so it is a bit risky to buy a cezanne scanner, but if your lucky you can scan high quality for years?

difficult dicission, other option is a epson 4900, is fairly cheap (100Euro) second hand and good enough quality to print up to 30x40,



Service and parts for the Cezanne are very expensive, if they're available at all. As a result, the condition of the unit is very important, as are the included accessories and software. The Cezanne is a significantly better scanner than the Epson. You did see the part about it being 5 foot wide?

[Peter De Smidt]

It's a bit risky to buy any scanner out of warranty and with limited/expensive service options. You can minimize this risk by being very thorough in your evaluation of the scanner. Is the scanner set-up and operational? If so, have a test scan made. Check what the maintenance routines say. Find out exactly what comes with the scanner, including computer and software. Download the manual and make sure you're well-versed with the scanner. A Cezanne must be configured for shipment properly.

If you consider the 4900 to be good enough quality for the size prints that you want to make, then you shouldn't get a Cezanne.

[barrybest]

He peter,

Normally I will print my images in the darkroom, The thing is I'm setting my own bussisnes with some comercial portrait work to generate some money and a quality scanner could help me making great scans for great prints wich makes happy customers.
next to that it would be nice to have a scanner to scan collodium positives, platinum prints and saltprints.

The scanner is up and running, it comes with a mac g5 software installed, im not sure but I think the adapters for the film are included as well,
like I said it is the same price as a new epson v750,

Thanks for giving your opinion, I dont know that much about the cizanne 5300 scanner.

barry


It's a bit risky to buy any scanner out of warranty and with limited/expensive service options. You can minimize this risk by being very thorough in your evaluation of the scanner. Is the scanner set-up and operational? If so, have a test scan made. Check what the maintenance routines say. Find out exactly what comes with the scanner, including computer and software. Download the manual and make sure you're well-versed with the scanner. A Cezanne must be configured for shipment properly.

If you consider the 4900 to be good enough quality for the size prints that you want to make, then you shouldn't get a Cezanne.

[Peter De Smidt]

Barry, Well, those are good signs. Note that there is no Cezanne 5300. There is the original Cezanne, an FTS-5000, and the Cezanne Elite, an FTS-5500. Have the owner run the maintenance program and report what it says. If it is moved, the carriage must be locked in the home position. This is clearly detailed in the manual.

[barrybest]

Oh it was a typo, it is the FT-S5000, it sounds like you know a good deal of scanners, what scanner are you using yourself?
is the cezanne FT-S5000 the same quality as a proffesional scanner? i mean if you have a epson v750 and a drum scanner where does it stand?

is it noticable on a 30x40 prints or only really large prints?

thanks a lot peter



Barry, Well, those are good signs. Note that there is no Cezanne 5300. There is the original Cezanne, an FTS-5000, and the Cezanne Elite, an FTS-5500. Have the owner run the maintenance program and report what it says. If it is moved, the carriage must be locked in the home position. This is clearly detailed in the manual.

[Peter De Smidt]

Hi Barry, I have the FT-S5000, as well as a dslr scanner that I made. At various points I had other flatbed scanners, an Epson and a Canon, and I had a Nikon Coolscan V scanner.

The Cezanne is a professional scanner. It cost over $30,000 new. See Tim Parkin's post, #42, to see some comparisons, at: http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?106507-Recommend-a-Good-Flatbed-Scanner/page5

Yes, Imo the difference is noticeable on 30x40 prints.

[Christian-NRW]

Barry, if negatives are what you are going to scan, by all means, go and get a Cezanne, quick! I made the same experiences Tim Parkin made. First, the Cezanne has an awful lot of resolution, vastly more than the Epson, btw. Don't believe me? Check this out, std Cezanne FT-S5000, USAF test target:

http://abload.de/img/usaf_testk7iid.jpg
here is the documentation to the target: http://www.silverfast.com/PDF/resolution-target/Resolution-Target_long_en.pdf

Depending on your judgement, you can see between 4600dpi and higher resolved. Mind you, this is the minimum resolution as USAF targets were not designed for digital image aquisitions, that'll be IMATEST for instance.

Second, grain is very, very minimally emphazised. In terms of grain, its even beating my Tango when it comes to negatives. Third, the RAW data from the Cezanne is already log-encoded, which makes negative conversion quite efficient as the values do not need to be shifted that much. The log-encoding is probably done in hardware as this was commonly done around the time when the Cezanne was developed.

I can give you samples if you would like to see how the output looks like.

Best wishes,
Christian