CarstenW
Member
Epson V750
I use a V750 with my Hasselblad 6x6 and Contax 645 negatives, mostly B&W, and quite like it. It is not quite as good as a Nikon 9000, and significantly worse than an Imacon, but then it is also much more affordable than either, so I have made my peace with this.
I scan my 645 negatives at 2400dpi and get about 25MP from that. Scanning at higher resolution has not yielded more usable data so far, just larger files. I am going to try with anti-Newton-ring glass directly on the glass, to see if I can get just a little more. I doubt I will try wet-mounting, given the hassle.
The 25MP images compete well with current high-end FF DSLR systems in detail, due to their AA filters. The tonality of true B&W is of course much nicer out of the box.
I use Epson Scan, btw. It is much easier to use than whatever workflow-disabled junk software that was also included. I might try it again sometime, but then again, I might not. Scanning software is really and truly almost uniformly horrid.
I use a V750 with my Hasselblad 6x6 and Contax 645 negatives, mostly B&W, and quite like it. It is not quite as good as a Nikon 9000, and significantly worse than an Imacon, but then it is also much more affordable than either, so I have made my peace with this.
I scan my 645 negatives at 2400dpi and get about 25MP from that. Scanning at higher resolution has not yielded more usable data so far, just larger files. I am going to try with anti-Newton-ring glass directly on the glass, to see if I can get just a little more. I doubt I will try wet-mounting, given the hassle.
The 25MP images compete well with current high-end FF DSLR systems in detail, due to their AA filters. The tonality of true B&W is of course much nicer out of the box.
I use Epson Scan, btw. It is much easier to use than whatever workflow-disabled junk software that was also included. I might try it again sometime, but then again, I might not. Scanning software is really and truly almost uniformly horrid.