PDA

View Full Version : The new Epson Scanner V700 looks very promising.



Rob_6274
11-Mar-2006, 18:43
Photo-i has started his review of the epson V700. It's very very close to Nikon 4000 performance, http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Reviews/interactive/Epson%20V700/page_8.htm

I imagine the V750M with better optical coating would be stellar :) Finally I can get a scanner that will scan my 35mm, 645, 6x6, 6x7, 6x9, 6x12, 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 film, and yes, I shoot them all, except the 8x10 which will arrive next week.

Kirk Gittings
11-Mar-2006, 22:26
Taking the word of a rep is very risky business. Lets wait for some real tests by real photographers.

Ted Harris
12-Mar-2006, 08:49
I expect to have either a V 700 or a 750 to review and evaluate by the end of this month. I have my fingers crossed that it will be a 750 but it is veryy iffy that it will be available then. Assuming I get one of them by the end of the month the results will be included in the round-up of scanners for the May-June issue of "View Camera." We have already tested the Microtek i800, 1800f and 1000XL for this round up and I have my fingers crossed we will be able to include real results from the new Epson's as well.

Brian Ellis
12-Mar-2006, 14:12
I don't think scanners can be evaluated properly by viewing images on a computer monitor. I think you have to see the prints. I also think you have to know what to look for. When I attended Ted and Mike's scanning workshop a print would look pretty good to me, then Ted or Mike would point out this problem here and that problem there, none of which I had noticed because the problems were subtle. But once you saw them they were glaring. So I wouldn't draw any conclusions from on-screen comparisons of the 700 and 750 with each other or with earlier models, I'd wait to see what people who are objective (i.e. who don't have an economic interest in selling them) and whose knowledge I respect (e.g. Ted and Kirk here) have tested them and see what they have to say about them.

Mike Chini
12-Mar-2006, 21:04
What I see so far is not really impressing me all that much. I can clearly see horizontal lines in all of Vincent's scans. While this may be due to increased resolution revealing cheaper manufacturing attributes (stepping motor?), it is not very reassuring. It's as if they improved the lens and sensor but left the mechanics of the 4990 in. If the 750 is no better in this regard, I will be pretty disappointed. Also, it is clear once again that Epson is inflating their specs and that an average film scanner is still much superior to a flatbed. I'm hoping the next sections in the review prove me wrong though!

Rob_6274
16-Mar-2006, 15:53
Vincent showed that the height of the film makes a big difference in sharpness. At 3.5mm setting, it outperforms the nikon 4000 and flextight. I wonder whether somebody would produce a film holder with a continuously variable heigh adjuster. I really can't wait to get this scanner :)

Kirk Gittings
16-Mar-2006, 20:02
There is know doubt that the Nikon is a great scanner, unfortunately on this forum most of us need a good scanner which will scan something larger tha 6x9. If Nikon had made a dedicated 4x5 film scanner many of us would have bought it allong time ago. I know I would have. I currently own and use a Nikon 8000, a MTK 1800f and two Epson 4990's and I borrow an Imacon on occasion. I would love to get rid of them for a one good scanner that would do up to 4x5 without having to buy my own Imacon.

Ed Richards
16-Mar-2006, 20:44
I am with Kirk - if there was a successor to the ancient poloroid 4x5 scanner I would bought it. I do not need nearly the resolution you get from 35mm film scanners, which Vince is concerned about. A real 2400 DPI with reasonable noise would be great. Even noise is not as much of an issue for those of us scanning black and white negatives.

Don Miller
17-Mar-2006, 08:08
For 4x5 and greater the issue is dmax, as far as I'm concerned. At this point it appears the V700 produces higher resolution at a smaller file size compared to the older Epson scanners. That's a sign of quality, as it is when comparing digital cameras. Perhaps with the fluid mount version we get a better factory adjustment for focal point. It seems the variance Vincent found with film height is individual to each unit.

sergio monai
17-Mar-2006, 10:22
The problem of height adjustment is simply a problem of focus. The Epson 1680 has the great possibility to tune the focus position,
is for that reason that it costs a lot more than these scanners? really professional scanners (creo, fuji, ancient agfa) were expensive because the mechanical enginnering is expensive. Said that, it's clear that the improvement is great from just few years ago. I don't expect a much better performance with the v750 because the money difference is due mainly to the software.

manuel johson
17-Mar-2006, 11:15
Please check page 14 of Vincent Oliver's review in which he describes his findings with 4x5. I do not know what to make out of his results and conclusions. I am showing my bias here but I wish he had scanned and magnified something else, instead of a picture of an embroidered bird and a printed label. Maybe this is good enough to tell us something of value. I would love to here your opinions.

John Fass
20-Apr-2006, 05:06
Just been geting to grips with my new V700 purchased here in Milan Italy. I am getting what i consider to be amazing results, very good shadow detail, colour fidelity, sharpness. All this scanning from trans. Scanning from neg, colours are predictably a bit more off centre, particularly with mixed light situations (I shoot architecture and interiors). I am using so far the Silverfast Se that bundled with the machine and digital ice (which seems to work REALLY well) on speed setting. However an 80mb scan from 5X4 original is still taking up to 7 minutes to complete. What am i doing wrong? Advice warmly appreciated.

Kirk Gittings
20-Apr-2006, 09:02
John,
Digital Ice takes a very long time on ANY scanner even dedicated film scanners like the Nikon 9000, because it is crunching significant numbers. That is partly why it is far superior to any competing dust removal software. There is no way around this and you will have to live with it.
Kirk

Kirk Gittings
20-Apr-2006, 14:53
John,

And at 7 minutes that is much faster than the 4990 at that size with DI on.

Antonio Corcuera
11-May-2006, 09:22
FYI, Photo-i has now started to review the Epson V750....

Emre Yildirim
11-May-2006, 11:51
I personally don't see a difference between the V700 scan and the V750 scan. Are both of those scanners using the same optics and just come with different software or what's the deal?

Don Miller
13-May-2006, 14:52
I personally don't see a difference between the V700 scan and the V750 scan. Are both of those scanners using the same optics and just come with different software or what's the deal?

The 750 has coated optics, some provision for wet mount, and (I'm guessing) an additional quality control step.

Ted Harris
13-May-2006, 15:30
The 750 has coated optics, some provision for wet mount, and (I'm guessing) an additional quality control step.

AFAIK the V700 also allows for wet mounting, you jus thave to pay extra for the "kit" from Epson. For that matter you can do the same on any flatbed but there are issues.

I posted the following on another thread on these scanners yesterday:

Epson told me this afternoon that I am on the top of the list for a 750 for review and that I should have a 700 next week so, with a bit of luck, I will have something useful to report before the end of June.

Meanwhile you will find a very useful review at http://www.galerie-photo.com/test-scanner-epson-v700-versus-4990.html ... it's in French but even if you don't read French worhtwhile for the images. Gaerie-Photo generally do rigerous impartial reviews and on a quick read this seems to be one of those. Seems as though the reviewer felt V700 outperforms the 4990 in some ways but not all.

riooso
27-Jun-2006, 18:48
I don't want to start a new stupid thread on scanners and you all seem to be experienced in scanners. I like shooting trans a lot more than negative film. It makes sense to me to scan my 4x5's with a flatbed and either print a 8x10 print using a printer or for some of my really killer trans go down to my local pro shop and have the slide scanned for $20 and printed by them. Questions:
1. Using a flatbed like the V700 for instance are high quality 8X10's posssible? I mean clean, sharp and detailed.
2. Assuming a good scan from a V700 what would be possible using the pro shop printer?

Thanks,
R

joolsb
5-Jul-2006, 11:16
For those who are interested, I knocked up a pretty rough homepage comparing my V700 and my MultiPro - mostly 35mm and 645 but there is one LF scan there (full image + 100% crop). I kept everything to default settings and applied no sharpening. The results are here: http://homepage.mac.com/jbarkway/ScanSamples/PhotoAlbum29.html

Ted Harris
5-Jul-2006, 11:39
joolsb, it is,of course, difficult to impossible to make any kind of useful comparison looking at small images on the web. That said, based on our tests, it is no surprise that the scans from the 645 fil made on a film scanner look as good or better than the crop of the 4x5. OTOH, for our purposes, a more meaningful comparison would be the results from the V700 v. those from a 4990/4870/i900 and it is there that we see either no difference or slightly worse preformance on the part of the V700.

Bruce Ho
5-Jul-2006, 18:48
My three weeks with a V750 seems to have been more positive than that of others whose comments I've seen, so I wanted to toss in my two cents. I've used a 4870 for about three years and hundreds of scans, and I've had some very small experience with WCI Tango scans (nine images, to be exact). The V750 can't, of course, compare favorably to the Tango scans, but I've found the V750 to be able to go deeper into the shadow areas in a meaningful way, compared to the 4870. I have a short discussion on this one aspect and a comparison scan between the V750 and the 4870 here:

http://www.bigislandphotos.com/epscancomp.html