Peter, it depends on what dedicated roll film scanner you have, but any cheap Plustek 8200 (or 7600) outresolves the V700 by some margin, here it says it resolves group 5.5 : https://www.filmscanner.info/en/Epso...onV750Pro.html, the test made by Pali shows 5.6 and 5.4, verticals bars and Horizontal bars, while a 35mm Plustek makes 6.0 or 6.1.
Pali also has in his web site a side by side Dry vs Wet with a V800: http://www.analogfilm.camera/2017/11...-or-dry-mount/ but is you apply a bit of sharpening to the best point for each samples you will find equal results.
Wet scanning has an remarkable effect with the V700 when film is curled, the V700 has no autofocus so if film is not in the right height then it has a performance loss, this has been measured by several people with similar results, this graph shows what happens is film is not in place:
The highest curve corresponds to Hor axis, it's more sensitive to height, while in the Vert direction we have a flat in the top (possibly) provocated by vibrations in the carriage displacement or similar.
There are other easy ways to place the film flat in the right position without wet mounting... or making the film to be flat.
Well, yes it would be interesting to also scan the samples wet for the V700, but what's for LF my guess is that it will make little difference, because LF lenses/negatives do extinguish contrast totally by some 2500dpi or 50lp/mm in practical shooting conditions, some LF lenses may deliver 80lp/mm lab, but real photography is not a lab with a flat chart.
Let's see how this test goes, IMHO Pali is to make a very good job by taking the samples. Let's see if once in a lifetime we'll be able to have a serene and fruitful debate about dpi , we can get useful information about when drum scanning makes a difference, and at what print size.
Bookmarks