Epson 4450 vs. 4990

[andrea_mrazkova]

I intend to scan mainly slides and film to use for a picture library

but cannot afford a dedicate scanner so I think of flatbed with a

transparency adapter. I could read good reviews about Epson 4450,

which is about half the price of 4990. Do you know, is there also

accordingly huge difference in quality?

[trw]

4990 can do 4x5, 120, and 35mm. 4450 can not do 4x5. I haven't heard of much difference quality-wise. What formats do you need to scan?

[conrad_hoffman]

Not sure about the model numbers. 4990 has a full size illuminator. I think it will scan any transparancy up to 8x10. The 4490 (what I've got) is almost identical, but only illuminates an area slightly larger than 120 roll film, about 2.7" (I think) wide. The quality is really excellent for a flatbed, and nothing can touch it at that price point. It cannot equal a dedicated film scanner, but for reasonable output sizes, it can be quite satisfying. IMO, if most of what you do is 35mm, consider a dedicated film scanner. If you have a lot of medium format stuff, the 4490 can be a winner.

[custom film holders for fl]

Andrea - Are you sure about the 4450 model number? I have not seen any informtion on that one yet.

<p>

Thanks,

<p> Doug<p>

<a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~dougfisher/holder/mainintro.html">Dougs

MF Film Holder for batch scanning of 120/220 medium format film with flatbeds</a>

[andrea_mrazkova]

Oh sorry, the number is 4490, not 4450. I need to scan mostly 35 mm and some MF too, then possibly prints but not 4x5. So I think if I should decide I would buy this one. Many thanks for your answer.

[eugene_scherba]

I believe 4990 provides higher dynamic range, which is important when scanning film. You can check the specifications for yourself, I don't recall them out of my head.

[john_shriver]

A used film scanner (say CoolScan IV-ED) should be in the same price bracket as a new Epson 4490 or 4990. The difference isn't just sharpness, it's the ability to pull anything out of dense areas of the slides.

 

That said, I have one of each, a CoolScan IV-ED for 35mm slides, and an Epson 2450 for MF and LF.

[davor_trumbic]

I found this statment on a very reputable site: Color and B/W negative films only go to about 1.4D perfect negatives, and in even heavily exposed ones almost never over 2.0D, so DMax has no importance for scanning from negatives.

 

Therefore for scanning blsck and white negatives Epson 4990 (Dmax:4.0)wouldn't be better then Epson 4490 ( Dmax: 3.4)? Could it be true?

[arkady ten]

Density for slides and for film somewhat different.

 

DMax for a scanner is probably measured as taking no film as a reference, which is probably close to what you see in slide film. Slides have pretty transparent base.

 

For negatives you have a darker base plus orange mask. Thus, unexposed negative film sits in the middle of the scanner dynamic range. For example, unexposed film density might be equal 1. Thus leaving you only 2.4 in usable range. I don't know the actual numbers and use arbitrary to demonstrate idea.

[ilkka_nissila]

The clear film (slide) is actually what might be called D-min.