Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    72

    Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    Can anyone tell me if I might get better images by photographing my 4x5 B&W negatives with a Nikon D850 instead of scanning them with my old Epson 4990 flatbed? I mean in terms of tonality and sharpness.

    The Epson is probably adequate for my purposes right now [Flickr] but if there's a significant improvement to be had by using the DSLR I might give it a go. [I have a 60mm macro lens & an old Bowens studio strobe already — I think I would just need a diffuser of some sort.]

    Thanks for any info.

    [On a related note, is there a specific method of developing B&W negatives for scanning? I'm thinking low-contrast negs would be better than dense ones.]

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Collinsville, CT USA
    Posts
    2,330

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    Also have a D850 and 60mm AF MICRO NIKKOR and an Epson V750 PRO. Both gave me excellent images... I had thought that, till I tried my 65mm and 120mm Macro-NIKKORs (both lenses off a Nikon Multiphot) with the D850. The sharpness of the digital images "noticeably" improved (FYI at the No. 3 aperture setting for both the 65mm and 120mm). I am splitting hairs though. Final contact Platinum/Palladium prints were made from 8x10 digital negatives (full 4x5 negative images used). Saw no difference in the final 8x10 Platinum/Palladium prints. If I were to make 16x20 digital negatives to print from, maybe, again maybe, I would begin to see a difference.

    As for "is there a specific method of developing B&W negatives for scanning?"... Good question. One article in VIEWCAMERA magazine stated that Diafine was the optimum developer to use. I settled on using TETENAL ULTRAFIN at 1:10 or 1:20 but at a lot longer development times than the mfg. recommends. Consistent development of negatives most important to me.

    Interested in other members opinions...

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    72

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    Thanks Greg. I'm reasonably happy with the results from the Epson 4990 for now. [I scan at 2400 DPI, which I read somewhere is the max. optical resolution of this scanner.]

    I'm not making prints, just putting images on Flickr so maybe the hassle of photographing and stitching the negs isn't worth it.

    I haven't used Diafine before — I've been using Ilford Ilfosol lately, which seems like a reasonable developer, though maybe it doesn't produce grain as fine as I'd like.

    Anyway, I will look for the article in View Camera thanks.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,901

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    Epson 4990 works.. The idea/practice of using a digital camera (any) to convert a film image to a digital file appears backwards in many ways. From set up precision/accuracy demands to lighting to optics involved to film size as a result and the numerous image quality losses/distortions involved with this means of conversion.. seems better to simply use the digital camera to produce the image instead of re-imaging film to digital.


    Bernice

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,573

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    To get the best scans when using a digital camera, you'll need a solid copy stand (many use re-purposed enlargers), a light source with very high CRI rating (99 is good), something to hold the negative (I don't scan 4x5 so can't recommend anything), a top-quality macro lens, remote release, and a camera. Sounds like you're good to go with regard to the camera and lens. There is a learning curve here. You need to ensure absolute alignment between the sensor plane and the film plane, dust is always (still?) an issue, and you'll need to do a bit of testing to determine what exposure will give you the best results. Bottom line...it ain't as easy as others sometimes make it sound, IMO.

    I've only digitally scanned 35mm - 6x9, but I can assure you that even single exposure results are far superior to my Epson flatbed scans of the same film (and I've been scanning film for over 20 years.) My Minolta Scan Elite 5400 II comes very close to a digital scan for 35mm.

    All this said, though, if you're only use case is to post online, then the Epson flatbed is more than adequate.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    72

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Epson 4990 works.. The idea/practice of using a digital camera (any) to convert a film image to a digital file appears backwards in many ways. From set up precision/accuracy demands to lighting to optics involved to film size as a result and the numerous image quality losses/distortions involved with this means of conversion.. seems better to simply use the digital camera to produce the image instead of re-imaging film to digital.


    Bernice
    Thanks Bernice. It does seem like using the DSLR for digitization is a bit inconvenient. If the results were going to be a lot better then maybe…

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    72

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan9940 View Post
    To get the best scans when using a digital camera, you'll need a solid copy stand (many use re-purposed enlargers), a light source with very high CRI rating (99 is good), something to hold the negative (I don't scan 4x5 so can't recommend anything), a top-quality macro lens, remote release, and a camera. Sounds like you're good to go with regard to the camera and lens. There is a learning curve here. You need to ensure absolute alignment between the sensor plane and the film plane, dust is always (still?) an issue, and you'll need to do a bit of testing to determine what exposure will give you the best results. Bottom line...it ain't as easy as others sometimes make it sound, IMO.

    I've only digitally scanned 35mm - 6x9, but I can assure you that even single exposure results are far superior to my Epson flatbed scans of the same film (and I've been scanning film for over 20 years.) My Minolta Scan Elite 5400 II comes very close to a digital scan for 35mm.

    All this said, though, if you're only use case is to post online, then the Epson flatbed is more than adequate.
    Thanks Alan. It sounds like quite a bit of work and possibly some expense [I'm on a tight budget].

    The strobe I have is an ancient Bowens monobloc — I'm not sure what the CRI rating of it is.

    It would be nice to see some of the improvement in final images that you mention but based on what you say, I think I'll stick with the Epson for now.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Seattle area, WA
    Posts
    1,328

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    Quote Originally Posted by stephenmcateer View Post
    Thanks Bernice. It does seem like using the DSLR for digitization is a bit inconvenient. If the results were going to be a lot better then maybe…
    Using a DSLR for digitization can be better than a flatbed.. but the effort/expense it takes to get there is large. Using a 4990 is much simpler and it has Digital ICE as a bonus. If you want better quality out of your 4990 you could try painting the insides of it matte black. There was a website that showed results before/after doing this years ago and it seemed to make a difference.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    72

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    Quote Originally Posted by domaz View Post
    Using a DSLR for digitization can be better than a flatbed.. but the effort/expense it takes to get there is large. Using a 4990 is much simpler and it has Digital ICE as a bonus. If you want better quality out of your 4990 you could try painting the insides of it matte black. There was a website that showed results before/after doing this years ago and it seemed to make a difference.
    Thanks for that. I think I'm going to stick with the Epson for now. The DSLR route looks too complex for me at this point.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    72

    Re: Epson 4990 vs Nikon D850?

    UPDATE: I've been looking at digitized images on Flickr. One user there in particular has results that look to me much superior to my own flatbed scans. Example: https://flic.kr/p/2nBTVZi

    I think I might give the DSLR method a go.

    [Note: he uses a Fuji GFX 50, whereas I have a Nikon D850, so maybe I won't achieve quite the same quality he has.]

Similar Threads

  1. Noritsu LS-600 or Nikon D850
    By PatrickMarq in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 7-Nov-2021, 04:07
  2. Replies: 31
    Last Post: 17-Nov-2007, 10:25

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •