4x5 scanner

[Beatty2111]

Hello,

New to LF photography, but not 35 or digital. Need to know if there is a scanner that is available that can scan 4x5 negatives with good results. I like to photgraph with film, but like to edit digitaly. My purchase of a 4x5 camera is actually on hold unitl I find a scanner that can match or (somewhat) replicate the film's resolution. ohh and drum scanner are too expensive. Any suggestions?

Thanks

[Ron Marshall]

Scanners such as the Epson 4990 will permit about a 3X quality enlargement.

The Microtek 1800 used to be the next step up from the 4990, but I think it has been discontinued, and there were complaints of quality control problems with that model.

Search this site for threads on scanning.

There is also a scanner comparison on the front page of this site.

Other threads have mentioned the possibility of obtaining a used high end scanner in about the $5000 range.

[Brian Ellis]

The Epson 4990 will do fine with prints up to about 11x14, maybe a little larger depending on your standards. Plus it will allow you to scan 8x10 negatives if you choose to go that route. As Ron said, there have been a lot of questions here about scanners and a search should provide you with plenty of information. Just to show you what the world's come to, there's even a thread in the LF forum on APUG at the moment dealing with scanners.

[Ted Harris]

The Microtek 1800f has been discontinued but there are still some in the supply chain. It is still the best solution for under $1000 and will give you scans capable of producing excellent prints up to 16x20. AFAIK the qc issues were neithe rbetter nor worse than that of any other conscumer grade scanner.

Other than the 1800f, either the Microtek i900 or the Epson 4990 will give excellent results with 4x5 negtives or transparencies for prints up to 11x14. Others will argue that you can print larger but, IMO and in the tests we did for View Camera magazine articles this what we feel. Again, acceptable quality is always, to a certain extent, in the eye of the beholder but there is no argument with the 4990 for eventual prints up to 11x14.

[65Galaxie]

How are you figuring only a 11x14? Scanning at 1200dpi (probably real resolution) would allow a 16x20 at slightly less than 300dpi. A pro lab I used to use suggested 200dpi for all digital prints but probably 300 is more of a standard. Would one view a 16x20 at .5 inches?

[Doug Fisher]

Van -

If your scanner is out of warranty, I would try to disassemble the scanner lid yourself and fix it. Epson support is expensive once you are out of warranty, so you don't have much to lose by trying. Hopefully, something just popped loose and can be put back into place or fixed with epoxy (WeldOn 16 works well with that plastic). There are exploded diagrams for the 4990 scanner in the files section of the Epson Scanners users group at Yahoo groups. That should help you figure things out.

Doug
---
www.BetterScanning.com

[Jack Flesher]

FWIW, I find that 1600 DPI on the 4990 is very good. That translates to roughly 6400 x 8000 pixels for 4x5. At 300 PPI print resolution, we are talking 20x24 prints pretty easily.

[vinny]

Quality is defined differently by every photographer so try to get your hands on examples before you buy. Prints made from un-sharpened originals will tell you alot. I remember hearing how good the epson 3200 was before i bought it. Compare it to my imacon scans or a tango drum scan and you see how good it is. If you are shooting 4x5 for more reasons than just movements then do plenty of research before you buy a piece of gear that's outdated in months.
I'm often not happy with the sharpness of my 16x20 wet prints but some say you can print 4x5 much larger and retain sharpness. Don't get me wrong, 20x24" prints from a flatbed may look great in some aspects.

here's a link to a comparison i did
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GuPD

vinny