Epson v700 vs. Nikon Coolscan V

[don_morris3]

Sorry for another scanner post, but I can't decide between the Epson v700 and

Nikon Coolscan V. Have searched and read many posts. I'm interested in

scanning mostly 35mm negatives, both color and black and white. However, am

interested in an all-in-one solution if possible as I have a few 4x5's and old

prints to scan. The pertinent question: will the v700 give me scans from

35mm negatives that I can get reasonable prints from (max size: 8x10). Or,

because the bulk of my images are 35mm, am I better off with a dedicated 35mm

scanner and adding a less expensive flatbed scanner for the other stuff.

Thoughts?

[ellis_vener_photography]

if only scanning 35mm film, get the Coolscan V.

[ronald_moravec1]

I ended up with both, a Minolta 5400 and Epson 4870. I don`t think the v700 has been out long enough so a lot of people use it. View Camera Magazine did a review and it was not up to a drum scanner. Not even close. It was a little better than older models, thats all.

 

A flatbed is nice for making electronic contact sheets if it has film strip holders. Do 4 strips, replace 2 with 25-36, rescan and throw away the 2 repeats. Merge in PS. Change the rebate to white if you want to actually print to save ink.

[calebcondit]

If you're doing 8x10s it'll do just fine. I printed some 13x19s from slide film that outdid some 8mp 20d shots I printed side by side. It's not a drum scanner by any means but is versatile. It'll definitely do the old prints justice. It's a step in the right direction. Ideally, you'd have a film scanner that does up to medium format AND this flatbed, but If you get just one, I'd do the v700 especially your ideal size is 8x10. If you're doing 20x30s then you'd have to go the other direction.

[beau 1664876222]

Don't even consider the flatbed for 35mm film. Especially given that the Nikon is almost the same price.

[juergenf]

I don't have any experience with the Epson V700, however, I do know from experience that the Nikon Coolscan V is a very good scanner that produces high quality files. If I were you, I'd go for the Nikon.

[jtk]

I have a Nikon V and an old Epson (3200). That Epson can generate scans for fine 6X9 prints from most subjects. Most folks might be entirely happy with them, though Nikon scans of the same frame are a lot better if one compares directly. If you are serious about "max 8X10", you'll be more than happy with the new Epson, which is evidently a lot better than the 3200. If you're going to scan 4X5 and prints you'll need a flatbed one way or another.

[mendel_leisk]

The logic of getting a flatbed to do double duty just isn't logical. Get a scanner for your 35mm that's for 35mm. Then sort out the rest.

[troyammons]

The V750 does okay for 35mm considering what it is. I got great results at 1800 dpi, and decent at 2400, but it is far below a film scanner.

 

Its good for about a 8x enlargement.

 

Test scans, no sharpening

 

http://www.pbase.com/tammons/color_film

[nilanjan_sen]

I used to own a Minolta Scan Dual IV and have a friend who owns the Coolscan V. I have owned the Epson for less than a week, so I cannot claim much experience with it. Here are the main pros and cons from my admittedly brief experience:

 

Pros:

1) The software is a breeze to install, especially compared to the Minolta;

2) Digital Ice works very well with color films;

3) You can scan many more frames at a time, which saves a lot of manual effort;

4) The quality of the scans is very nice even at the default settings.

 

Cons:

1) The file size at the highest setting is huge even for 35mm (about 150 MB per TIFF file), which is too much for my PC to handle;

2) Scan times are extremely slow at the highest setting, and it is no rocket even at the default JPEG compression;

3) I find the huge glass surfaces to be dust magnets, necessitating a wipe-down before each use;

4) It is much larger than the Nikon, and the Minolta looks like a cigar box in comparison. Its front-to-back dimension can challenge a typical home office shelf.

 

Here is the bottom line - I am sure the Nikon is better as far as ultimate resolution is concerned. However, if you have the space and want the convenience of scanning large batches at a time while still getting very good scan quality, you can't go wrong with the Epson. I admit that as a confirmed cheapskate, I was also titillated by the deal I got from Newegg - $384 and free shipping.

[doug_nelson3]

Since most of your scans will be from 35mm, $500 or so for the Coolscan V is pretty reasonable, considering the quality of scans of which it's capable. Since nearly any home office could benefit from a flatbed (which can function like a copier for small jobs), why not get an Epson flatbed? The older 4990 can be had quite cheap these days, and Doug Green's improved film holders for MF can be had at www.betterscanning.com.

[don_morris3]

Knowing how often this topic is discussed, I'm certainly appreciative of the great response! As the majority of my old stuff is 35mm and I plan to continue to shoot black and white 35mm, I'm going for the Nikon. Figure I'll add a flatbed later (perhaps the 4990) for the other stuff and contact sheets. Again, many thanks!