Epson 3200 vs Epson 4490

<p>Does anyone know what (if any) differences there are between the Epson 3200 and Epson 4490?<br>

I am very interested in differences in image quality.<br>

Also curious about which will have an easier workflow for scanning 220 medium format film: how many 6x4.5 frames can be quickly scanned at a time for previews? How many can be fully scanned at one time?<br>

Any replies would be greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>Andriy, The biggest real difference was in the software, the 4490 having improved dust removal and Digital Ice (as I recall). The DPI on the 4490 may be higher, but usable resolution is not significant. You should be able to do 3 images of that size at a time. For high production, I would uncheck the Thumbnail box, and scan the entire strip in one shot, then split it up in Photoshop, or whatever program you use.</p>

<p>I have a 3200 and it definitely doesn't have ICE, and annoyingly Epson didn't rewrite drivers for 64 bit. 3rd party ones work, as does making a 3200 entry into the 4490's Vista or XP 64-bit .inf driver file.</p>

<p>Fortunately this also works in Windows 7 64 bit. The two scanners share the same control codes and ICE will show up as an option on the 3200, but of course it won't work.</p>

<p><strong>@Brad Smith:</strong> If the difference between them were only $40, would you go for the 4490 instead? Or does ICE make enough difference to justify the somewhat higher cost? I've also heard of people turning ICE off altogether to save per-scan time, then making similar adjustments in Photoshop instead ...</p>

<p>I would go for the 4490 because Epson is still updating drivers - maybe that will continue; perhaps to Epson it's a 'current' product.</p>

<p>I hear ICE works, but I have some scanned images of snow scenes where there is just so much little pieces of snow on branches, etc. that I can't imagine ICE handling that well, but I guess it supposedly does. Film is easily cleaned so I guess the main use of ICE is against scratches or dust that's been exposed on the film.</p>

<p>For cleaning scratches from old film in my scans (or pro scans needed for 35mm - always with things like ICE disabled), I like to meticulously fix them. It gives me a chance to 'get intimate' with every square cm of the photo, where I often find other things to be fixed.</p>

<p>I have a 4490 and can scan 4 645 and 3 6x6 images in one shot. I made a fluid mount that has given much more life to it.</p>

<p>I would expect the 4490 too should be cut short on it's life, as the v500 replaced it and the v600 has already replaced the v500. I am a rare happy Vista64 owner and do not plan to update anytime soon. If you are considering buying new (or referb) you should consider it more of a short term purchase or just go and get a v600.</p>

<p>I'm on a budget and it's just really hard to know what's worth the extra dough ...<br>

At the end of the day a $200 difference might not be a ton of money <b>IF</B> the $200 buys higher-quality scans and timed saved scanning. But I've seen so few comparisons between all these models that it remains a pretty big <b>IF</b></p>

 

<p>I.E. Would a 3200 compared to V600 be like night and day?</p>

 

<p>Here are the prices, best ones I can find here in Canada. These options make me super confused as to where to settle for my first MF film scanner:<br>

* Epson 3200 (local used) $100<br>

* Epson 4490 (new) $150<br>

* Epson V500 (new) $230<br>

* Epson V600 (local new) $300</p>

<p>We of course can't tell you which way to go with your budget, but ever since I started saving up for better gear, I never looked back. A significant upgrade makes the investment last longer (or at least seems to which to me extends each dollar).</p>

<p>Of course you are right, money questions are highly subjective.<br>

Normally I wouldn't care so much, but I am on a pretty tight budget at the moment. Saving up is an option too, but it's painful having unscanned film sitting around ...<br>

I've ruled out the Epson 3200 thanks to another thread on this site. I also know the V500 is only marginally better than the 4490.<br>

I guess this question remains: <strong>Is the Epson V600 a significant upgrade compared to the Epson 4490?</strong><br>

. For 6x4.5 220 film that is ...</p>

<p>When I was choosing, 35mm scanning was not a thought. I have a Plustek that scanned wonderfully in that arena. The big thing for me was the light source. I wound up favoring the lamp (4490) as opposed to the LED in the v500. It turned out to be not much of an issue and life goes on.</p>

<p>The big thing with these scanners is the horrid film mounts. Not much point in ranting and it led to this <a href="http://myfilmstuff.blogspot.com/2010/04/5-wet-mount.html">http://myfilmstuff.blogspot.com/2010/04/5-wet-mount.html</a> . No matter what you wind up with, it is something to consider.</p>