ClubSNAP Photography Forums

Go Back   ClubSNAP Photography Forums > Equipment Discussions > Printers and Scanners

Printers and Scanners Discuss printing and scanning topics here


 
Thread Tools
Old 5th October 2007   #1
offtheroad
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22
Default Neg scanning on a flatbed

I realize a dedicated neg scanner is the best but price is a problem. How good is the latest Epson scanner Epson Perfection V700 PHOTO. I've been told that scanning B&W negs is harder than color negs. The problem is that I use to work in a government lab and I use 4x5 leaf scanners and the very high end 11x14 epson flatbed. But I haven't seen any results on these new 8x10 scanners.
jbechdel@comcast.net
offtheroad is offline  
Old 6th October 2007   #2
enivre
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,695
Default Re: Neg scanning on a flatbed

The V700 is as good as it gets for that price. That said, it then boils down to what format will you most be scanning.

If you are going to need to scan MF and 4x5s then the V700 is the best bang for buck. If you are doing only 35mm then you can consider a nikon Coolscan (which will still set you back more than a V700).

I've compared an imacon scan and a V700 scan of the same slide. They come really close, so close that if you ask me you can hardly tell the difference up front unless you start pixel peeping.

But I've heard that the imacons can pull out more detail from the shadows. I haven't had much trouble with that on my V700 though, but then again, I'm not that particular especially considering the cost of scanning just 8 rolls of 120 film on an imacon will set me back enough to buy me a V700.

Go google "Epson V700 Reviews" I believe there's a website out there that has done quite an extensive review on the scanner.

Good luck!
enivre is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 05:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2009 ClubSNAP.com
Page generated in 0.04586 seconds with 7 queries