Diff between Epson 700 and 750-M

[77seriesiii]

Ok, dont want to beat a dead horse but my scanner of 8 years died and we cant get a drum scanner yet. We are looking at the Epson 700 and 750-M. we shoot MF, 4x5, wholeplate, 8x10 and collodion. I am also looking at one of the scanner additions either betterscan back or scan science.

So two questions:

Is there a difference btwn the 700 and 750-M?

Which is better betterscan or scan science?

Thanks

Erick

[David de Gruyl]

If betterscan is betterscanning.com, they work great. The MF film holder is very adjustable and the ANR glass helps scanning. I have no information on the other one.

I believe that the difference between the 700 and 750 is a wet mount holder, Silverfast AI (not a demo: full license for that scanner) and a color profiling software / Color target that I can't remember the name of.

I seem to remember them being very close in price this time last year.

All things considered, it is a fine scanner for MF and larger. The best I can say for 35mm is that it scans. The film holders are not great (generally), but 4x5 works very well. You probably want to replace the MF holder.

[rdenney]

I believe that the difference between the 700 and 750 is a wet mount holder, Silverfast AI (not a demo: full license for that scanner) and a color profiling software / Color target that I can't remember the name of.

(There is also talk that the 750 has an anti-reflective coating on something or other.)

The color software that it comes with is Xrite (Monaco) EZ-Color, and it includes a 5x7 reflective and a 4x5 transparency IT8 target. I don't know who makes the transparency target, but the results seem to be pretty good for use with Fuji films. It doesn't come with a 35mm target, which is a shame (I still had to buy a target from Wolf Faust for use in my Nikon film scanner). The software wanted to profile my monitors, and I had to slap it upside the head to keep it from doing so (I already have a Gretag MacBeth system for that). If you don't have IT8 targets already, and if you want to establish a color-managed workflow, then the marginal price of the 750 might be a cheap way to get them.

Rick "who bought the 750 as a refurb direct from Epson" Denney

[77seriesiii]

I have both reflective and transparency 4x5 targets that came w/ the dead scanner so that really isnt an issue.

Are both set up for wet mounting or only the 750?

The calibration software is a nice touch and I do have an older sensor from Monaco.

./e

[sanking]

Aside from the films holders suppled, and the software, there is one small hardware difference between the V700 and V750. The glass in front of the sensor of the V750 has an anti-reflection coating (like modern lenses), the glass of the V700 is plain and does not have this coating.

In theory the anti-reflection glass might reduce bloom on the V750 but I don't know of any tests that actually makes a comparison.

Bear in mind that whether you choose the V700 or V750 both have two separate lens assemblies, and both are fixed focus. In order to optimize results from these scanners you will need to adjust the height of the film holders above the glass to find the plane of best focus.

Sandy King

[77seriesiii]

Sandy,

thank you for information. I thought I had read the glass was different in the two systems but couldn't find it again so I thought I had dreamed it up.

In your opinion, bearing in mind I will probably be getting a betterscan wet mount solution for MF and 4x5, which would be the better scanner to get, 700 or the 750? I will be shooting 90% B&W and shifting into alternative areas (collodion, cyanotype, vandyke, etc.) and my wife, the professional, will be shooting predominantly MF in the 6x6, 6x7 and 6x9 formats. she who must be obeyed has also been grumbling about a drum/high end scanner but am just beginning the search and understanding what is good, what is reliable, parts availability and most importantly what I can afford.

I have read the method posted by Jeremy, scan elevation on the cheap, not sure the wife would buy into that, worth asking though.

A lot going on in that statement but if anyone wants to answer some aspect or all, I am in receive mode.

Thanks

Erick

[rdenney]

...and my wife, the professional, will be shooting predominantly MF in the 6x6, 6x7 and 6x9 formats. she who must be obeyed has also been grumbling about a drum/high end scanner but am just beginning the search and understanding what is good, what is reliable, parts availability and most importantly what I can afford....

I have a V750 but I find it marginal for scanning 6x9 and smaller, depending on my expected print size. For roll film, a good compromise between a flatbed like the Epson and a drum scanner is a film scanner, such as the Nikon 8000 or 9000. The 8000 is a bit older now (like all film scanners) but it sells in the $1000-1200 range and they work very well, with about twice the effective linear resolution of the flatbed and better tonal gradation. The 9000 is the newer model, and still much more expensive, but it is really only a marginal improvement over the 8000, mostly in speed. Both use the same film holders and accessories. The 8000 interfaces to a computer using a Firewire cable, which is still commonly and cheaply available, unlike the SCSI connection used on some earlier film scanners.

I have not tried the 750 using a wet mount (though mine came with a wet-mount kit sans fluids), so that may close the gap between it and the film scanner. But I have found it most useful to have the Nikon film scanner for medium format and the Epson for 4x5, with both serving about the same ultimate print size. Getting both is, of course, more than double the Epson alone, but it's still quite a bit cheaper than a used drum scanner.

Rick "noting that 8000's still sell today for what I paid for mine five years ago" Denney

[77seriesiii]

Rick

Thank you for that idea and we have been kicking it around as well. It will take us a bit of time to figure out what type of scanner to get (film, flatbed, drum). by a bit of time I think this weekend before the negatives hit critical mass and explod. If we get the flatbed as an interim fix we are going to try the wet mount, variable height for all of the film sizes we use and then make another decision.

Going to go over to the high end scanner group on yahoo and do some more lurking.

Erick

[sanking]

In your opinion, bearing in mind I will probably be getting a betterscan wet mount solution for MF and 4x5, which would be the better scanner to get, 700 or the 750? I will be shooting 90% B&W and shifting into alternative areas (collodion, cyanotype, vandyke, etc.) and my wife, the professional, will be shooting predominantly MF in the 6x6, 6x7 and 6x9 formats. she who must be obeyed has also been grumbling about a drum/high end scanner but am just beginning the search and understanding what is good, what is reliable, parts availability and most importantly what I can afford.

Erick

Erick,

I would suggest that you buy a V700 and learn to use it. Epson had these for sale recently refurbished for about $400. This will get you in the game for a lot of money, and if you don't print too large it should give acceptable results even with MF. After you learn more about scanning you can determine if the extra expense, size and complications of a drum/high end flatbed suit your needs.

Sandy King

[77seriesiii]

Sandy, or anyone used seen both...

Thank you for the advice. In your mind does the anti-reflective and better mirror material found on the 750 warrant the added price?

./e

[sanking]

Sandy, or anyone used seen both...

Thank you for the advice. In your mind does the anti-reflective and better mirror material found on the 750 warrant the added price?

./e

Erik,

Hard to say since I have never seen any direct comparison of real results between the two. However, based on various factors I decided that for purposes any possible improvement in possible image quality did not warrant the considerable extra cost of the V750. If you need the extra bundled software that comes with the V750, or the fluid mount station, others might decide differently.

I have been pleasantly surprised by the quality of the V700, once the holders are adjusted for the optimum plane of focus. The scan quality is definitely good enough for prints up to 16X20 size from 4X5" negatives IMHO.

Sandy King

[Brian Ellis]

I have a 4990, the predecessor of the 700/750 series. From the tests I've seen there's little if any difference between them, at least in terms of resolving power. I tried scanning 6x7 b&w negatives with the 4990 and my experience was similar to Rick's. I was reasonably happy with the results when the print was 8x10 or smaller but anything larger wasn't satisfactory. It's been a great scanner for 4x5 and 8x10 but not 6x7.

[sanking]

I have a 4990, the predecessor of the 700/750 series. From the tests I've seen there's little if any difference between them, at least in terms of resolving power. I tried scanning 6x7 b&w negatives with the 4990 and my experience was similar to Rick's. I was reasonably happy with the results when the print was 8x10 or smaller but anything larger wasn't satisfactory. It's been a great scanner for 4x5 and 8x10 but not 6x7.

The V700 has two lenses, one is called a "high resolution" lens and it is activated when you choose film area guide. The other lens is called a "super high resolution" lens and itis activated when you choose film holder. Epson's use of terminology is a bit optimistic in the case of both. If you use the HR lens effective resolution is approximately the same as what you get with the Epson 4990. However, if you can use the SHR lens effective resolution is quite a bit better than with the 4990. In direct tests of the two scanners I was able to get about 1800 dpi effective resolution with the 4990 and the V700 using the HR lens. However, with the SHR lens effective resolution was around 2300 dpi.

The plane of best of focus was determined for all tests with both scanners.

Sandy King

[Heroique]

I have a 4990, but I've rented a v750 for a very limited, side-by-side comparison.

I used a sheet of 4x5 Velvia-50 film (nicely exposed w/ minute details in the subject) and snugly dry-mounted w/ a film holder similar to Doug Fisher's design.

I used Epson Scan for the comparison, selecting the "film w/ film holder" option in each case (i.e., not the "film w/ area guide" option). So I was comparing the 4990's single fixed lens w/ the v750's "SHR" fixed lens.

My tests weren't rigorously scientific, but I found my 4990's best plane of focus, which I understand is unique from model to model, to be about 2mm above the glass. However, there seemed to be enough DOF for me to say: 2mm ... plus/minus .25mm. (I'd like to hear more about this DOF "tolerance" from others.)

At this optimal plane of focus, my 4990's maximum resolution is about 2000 dpi, perhaps a touch less. I really have to squint (:cool:) to see improvement above 1500 dpi, but it's there if I look carefully enough.

When I rented the v750, I likewise determined its best plane of focus; it occurred at a slighly higher elevation than my 4990.

I then compared the two scanners at 2000 dpi.

My personal result: I couldn't tell the difference between these scans w/ several carefully inspected crops. However, there was a different "look" to the images that would be difficult for me to describe.

When I went to higher dpi, up to 2400, I still couldn't tell the difference, but I was making comparisons w/ E-6 4x5 film, not a fancy line resolution chart. If I had done so, I suspect the v750 may have appeared a tiny bit better; and it might have appeared better at 1800-2000, too. However, since I rarely print larger than 11x14, the slightly better performance, if I had seen that it existed, would probably be negligible to me.

[77seriesiii]

Sandy,Rick,Heroique, everyone; AWESOME! Thank you very much, that is a savings of at least $300!

Just need to drop an order! Not looking forward to spending the dosh but...it is getting harder to convince my wife that we never had a scanner and I have no idea what that big beige box is beside her monitors.

Thanks again everyone.

Erick