Epson V600 CanoScan 9000F

[Marvin]

Just wonder what users of these think about them. I am interested in scanning 35mm and Medium Format film. I was hoping to keep the budget under $200 and get the best scans possible. I have an older Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV film scanner but have herd that newer flat beds have come along way.
Marvin

 

[glhs116]

They have not come that far. I have a Scan Dual IV and it is sharp at 3200 dpi. The best flatbeds are good for about two thirds of that. They will happily scan at higher resolutions but are not resolving more detail above, typically, around 2200-2400 dpi.

Having said that, resolution is not everything. I don't use the Dual IV because I get much better colour and subtlety of tone from my Coolscan. You might also find that a modern flatbed gives you better colour and gradation. But for resolution you will be disappointed.

 

[johnnywalker]

I have a CanoScan 9000F and am very happy with it. That said, it's my first film scanner, and I have nothing to compare it to.

 

[Doug Fisher]

I would be hesitant to trade a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV for a flatbed to scan 35 mm because I think it will still have an edge in terms of sharpness. If you aren't getting good color, I would look into what you can change in your scanning workflow and/or check to make sure the lens is not fogged. With that said, the Minolta can't scan 120 so it looks like you are going to need to get another scanner anyway. Therefore, you will have the opportunity to do 35 mm comparison scans and be able to definitively answer your question!

I like the software on the Epson's better than Canon. Additionally, you can often get a great deal on a refurbished V500 from the clearance section at the EpsonStore website.

Doug

 

[cooltouch]

I pretty much agree with everything that's been posted above. The SD IV really does have an edge over flatbeds -- doesn't matter which flatbed you're talking about either. But a good Epson or Canon should do a more than acceptable job for medium format.

I was in your situation a couple years ago. I had a budget of $200 and I wanted a better scanner than my Epson 3170. I wanted one that would scan medium format, but my plans have been to buy a large format system someday, so I researched what was available, used and new, that would handle 4x5. I came up with two scanners that fit my budget: the Epson 4990 and the Canon 9950. That Canon is proportedly an excellent scanner, but is about as rare as hens' teeth. The Epson is more common. I ended up doing a nationwide search on Craigslist, using a web-based utility called SearchTempest, and found a 4990 for the right price in Chicago (I live in Houston). The owner agreed to ship, and a week or so later I was the proud owner of a lightly used 4990.

Welp, I still don't own a 4x5, but I've scanned a lot of 120 negatives and slides, and it's done a great job. So, basically what I'm saying is, don't rule out used. The 4990 was replaced by the V7xx models and is closer in design and function to those than it is to the V500 or V600, so you're getting a lot of scanner for a fair sum -- should you go that route.

 

[Marvin]

If the lens is fogged on the Scan Dual IV how do you clean it? Thanks for all the information and I do 35mm medium format and 4x5 so it would be nice to do all of them.

 

[glhs116]

It is much more likely to be the mirror than the lens. It is cleanable but you want to treat it with very special care. These single surface mirrors are unbelievably delicate. If you can get it fairly clean with only air leave it at that. If you feel you need to clean it more you will need to do it in a way that involves not touching it at all except by the edges. A few astronomy sites have howtos on cleaning single surface mirrors...

 

[pellicle]

To the OP

if Doug doesn't mind me using his quotes ...

I would be hesitant to trade a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV for a flatbed to scan 35 mm because I think it will still have an edge in terms of sharpness.

I can only re-enforce this ... as the format gets larger the need of higher dpi accuracy gets smaller. 4000dpi scans of 4x5 inch film would press the limits of many systems to simply hold the image in memory

think about that 4000 x5 = 20,000 so the image would be 20,000 x 16,000 pixels which is about 320 Megapixels.

consequentially people think that 2000dpi scans are "more than adequate"

conversely as the format gets smaller (down to digital sizes) the requirement of accuracy gets higher ... thus for 35mm (which is 1.4 inches x 1 inches) one needs that thousands of DPI.

I like the software on the Epson's better than Canon.

and I like the ability to control the Epson better than the Canon. There are some good examples on the net, but I think that the Epson outperform them. Of course you could always look at the market and see what they voted in with sales ... I'm wagering the Epson kills the Canon in that area.

As has been mentioned, there really hasn't been that much development in the scanners (some, but not earth moving). Consequentially these older examinations are still of worth

in my view ...: Epson 3200 more optimal scans

in my view ...: Epson flatbed film scanners (why improving them is not as simple as it looks)

see how you go with that as a starter ... anyway, if you don't agree, don't mind me ... I'll just go back to being quiet

PS: good to see you're still around Doug ... so far since getting back from Finland I have not yet dug out that holder I bought from you to scan any 120 ... nor in fact have I shot any 120 in the fair land of Oz.

sigh ... busy life

 

[Marvin]

Thanks for all the info, I am going to keep the Scan Dual IV for 35mm and get a flatbed for medium format. I will have to get new software if I go to Windows 7 as the Minolta is not supported any more.

 

[Alan Klein]

Click below to see my scans of 120 and 35mm slides and negatives with the V600 (similar to the V500 only you can scan three with the V600 vs 1 or 2 with the V500). I haven't used the other model you referred too; the V600 is my only scanner. The V600 comes with Epson's scanner software which I use. Good luck on whatever you decide.