Epson V850 Discontinued?

[braxus]

I just got word that the Epson V850 flatbed scanner has been discontinued, do to the internal CCD no longer being made. And they state there will be no new replacement either, so this is the end of the line for these pro scanners.

Get yours now if you are thinking about it because scalpers will be buying them all up soon.

 

[MattKing]

There is at least a hint about that in this thread discussing the version made for the market in Japan: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/epson-v850-pro-vs-epson-gt-x980-scanner.211777/#post-2868469

 

[Trail Images]

I'm not sure this unit is still available from Microtek but it was listed on their site. I've had the i900 Microtek since it was first released and it does an excellent job. I always thought as all of Epson products were so popular they'd continue on as an option as long as film was produced. The link takes a minute to display the information after going to the site.
Microtek Film Scanner

 

[retina_restoration]

I just got word that the Epson V850 flatbed scanner has been discontinued, do to the internal CCD no longer being made. And they state there will be no new replacement either, so this is the end of the line for these pro scanners.

Get yours now if you are thinking about it because scalpers will be buying them all up soon.

This is just a rumor based on a single data point. Epson has denied it.

 

[loccdor]

I would not consider them pro scanners. The tests I've seen online show they do not have more true resolution than Epson 4490s that sold for $100 in 2010 and go for even less today. Somewhere between 1500-2200 dpi true resolution. They sure are expensive for what they can do.

 

[runswithsizzers]

@braxus, can you please provide a link to the source of your information?

 

[retina_restoration]

@braxus, can you please provide a link to the source of your information?

He probably saw the same YouTube video we've all seen.

 

[retina_restoration]

I would not consider them pro scanners. The tests I've seen online show they do not have more true resolution than Epson 4490s that sold for $100 in 2010 and go for even less today. Somewhere between 1500-2200 dpi true resolution. They sure are expensive for what they can do.

Well yes. But in an age where "appliances" in general last 18-24 months before failure, the Epson scanners are long-lived and reliable. My V750 is 12 years old now. I am all for paying a bit more for an appliance that is likely to deliver 10-20 years of service, a rare opportunity in this age.

 

[runswithsizzers]

I'm not sure this unit is still available from Microtek but it was listed on their site. I've had the i900 Microtek since it was first released and it does an excellent job. I always thought as all of Epson products were so popular they'd continue on as an option as long as film was produced. The link takes a minute to display the information after going to the site.
Microtek Film Scanner

That one looks good on paper! The ArtixScan F2 model was not available on Amazon, US, but there were several models capable for scanning film listed on Amazon, ranging from $475 to over $1500 for the Artixscan 1100. However, I noticed Amazon listed those as having SCSI connectivity. Not sure if that's a mistake on Amazon's part, or if maybe someone has some old stock? Or maybe SCSI is coming back! (oh no,please not).

 

[loccdor]

Well yes. But in an age where "appliances" in general last 18-24 months before failure, the Epson scanners are long-lived and reliable. My V750 is 12 years old now. I am all for paying a bit more for an appliance that is likely to deliver 10-20 years of service, a rare opportunity in this age.

That's reasonable, if the more expensive appliance really does last longer. My Epson 4490 lasted 13 years, failed by the bulb dying. I replaced it with a secondhand 4490. I just worry that people are paying for air here and the company is doing the standard thing of releasing a few products that are essentially the same unit but at wildly different prices.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Oh well... When mine conks out, there is always my dslr...

 

[OrientPoint]

My v750 is 17 years old and is still kicking. They're very reliable, they're USB and they made tons of them over the years. I don't imagine it'll be too hard to find good second-hand ones from now to the year 2100.

FWIW if I were to hoard these scanners I'd go for the v800/850 for the LED light source. LED's do go bad eventually (as a few Pakon owners are finding that out these days) but they're longer lived and more reliable than the older fluorescent light sources used in the 700 series.

 

[runswithsizzers]

My Epson Perfection V37 (now 12 years old) is starting to squeek. I certainly don't need the V850, or anything else with a transparency adapter because I use a digital camera to digitize my film. And I definitely do not want a scanner/printer combo. So I guess the replacement model for my V37 would be the Epson Perfection V39 II. However, the Amazon reviews for that model don't look great. Maybe I should look at other brands?

 

[Trail Images]

That one looks good on paper! The ArtixScan F2 model was not available on Amazon, US, but there were several models capable for scanning film listed on Amazon, ranging from $475 to over $1500 for the Artixscan 1100. However, I noticed Amazon listed those as having SCSI connectivity. Not sure if that's a mistake on Amazon's part, or if maybe someone has some old stock? Or maybe SCSI is coming back! (oh no,please not).

Thank you for the update.
As old as my Microtek i900 is I do have concerns. However, I have used this unit since day one when I got it and use it at least a few times a month to this day. I use Silverfast software although it came with it's own software too.
If you or anyone finds out that the later unit I assume the Artixscan F2 or similar is available let us know. My very old i900 is USB driven and works fine as is. I use it often for 120 & 4x5. It comes with slide holders for 35mm, 120 & 4x5 that slide into an open bay area with no glass between the scanning element and film. It does of course also have a glass top area to scan flat material as well in reflective mode.

 

[brbo]

That's reasonable, if the more expensive appliance really does last longer. My Epson 4490 lasted 13 years, failed by the bulb dying. I replaced it with a secondhand 4490. I just worry that people are paying for air here and the company is doing the standard thing of releasing a few products that are essentially the same unit but at wildly different prices.

V850 is not the same as 4490. There's about a 1000dpi difference in REAL resolution. Whether that is worth the price difference is debatable, of course.

 

[braxus]

I dont know how legit this is, but yes it's the same video you all saw.

 

[koraks]

The allegation in the video is that no more linear CCD's would be manufactured anymore. This is evidently not true and probably just an unfortunate formulation or misunderstanding on behalf of the guy in the video. There are several manufacturers for linear CCD's and there's no speak whatsoever of all of them suddenly ceasing production of these. It is of course entirely plausible that Epson can't be bothered to bring out a new type in the same series to deal with the end-of-life announcement of one particular CCD sensor type (or a strategic stock having run out), particularly in the face of vanishingly low unit sales.

 

[Film-Niko]

Epson has already denied that it will stop their scanner production:

Epson Denies Claim That Its CCD Film Scanners Are Approaching 'End of Life'

Epson flatly denies the claim that its flatbed CCD film scanners are approaching "end of life" and says they're still actively being made.

petapixel.com

 

[MattKing]

thread title tweaked just a little bit.....

 

[braxus]

There's the old adage that you can't believe everything you see online, especially Youtube. I guess maybe I was incorrect on this, though it did sound credible.

 

[Hassasin]

I would not consider them pro scanners. The tests I've seen online show they do not have more true resolution than Epson 4490s that sold for $100 in 2010 and go for even less today. Somewhere between 1500-2200 dpi true resolution. They sure are expensive for what they can do.

Looks like you're either twisting facts, never used one, or both. it was 4890/4990 that are close match to what 700/800 can put out, not 4490. Not to mention 4490 does MF film nothing larger. 4490 was predecessor of 500/600 flatbeds.

Still 700/800 are also much newer and have rather preferable form factor (with flat top, so your sandwich does not slide off when batch scanning).

In all this add each sample performance, which can vary quite widely, with some needing much more tweaking to get to same/similar result. Applies to all of them.

 

[koraks]

Looks like you're either twisting facts, never used one, or both.

Maybe he was just honestly mistaken. Happens to the best of us, doesn't it?

Still 700/800 are also much newer and have rather preferable form factor (with flat top, so your sandwich does not slide off when batch scanning).

It's only the edges and the front section that curve downward; the top itself is flat. Never tried to put a sandwich on top of it to be honest, but I'm pretty sure I could fit at least four of them, and pile up on those as well.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

I've been reading the back and forth on this for a week or so now.

As much as I like that new scanners are available, these units IME are pretty indestructible(I have a V700, plus a 4990 bought more recently when I needed a scanner in a pinch and couldn't get to my V700-thanks to USPS the 4990 took a trip around the country and I got it after I was able to retrieve my V700...so haven't done anything beyond make sure it works) and I imagine that the market is pretty well saturated with a lot of the folks who would buy one already having one.

WIth that said, I'd not paid much attention and for some reason had it in my head that the 700 series switched to LEDs, something I've learned was wrong thanks to this thread. I guess that makes sense given the amount of time I've spent waiting on lamp warm-up in the V700. That makes me want to go out and buy a V800 or V850, but a new V850 comes alarmingly close to what I could buy an older Imacon/Hasselblad for...

Incidentally, my main pressing use for getting mine out of storage was to scan 65/70mm film, something I couldn't do on my Nikon 9000. I just took delivery of an aftermarket 8000/9000 fluid mount, which easily handle 70mm film(wet or dry) so unless I get seriously back into large format my V700 may sit for a while again...the Nikons have their own quirks, but I've used them so much more I know those quirks better than I do the Epsons.

 

[loccdor]

Looks like you're either twisting facts, never used one, or both. it was 4890/4990 that are close match to what 700/800 can put out, not 4490. Not to mention 4490 does MF film nothing larger. 4490 was predecessor of 500/600 flatbeds.

Still 700/800 are also much newer and have rather preferable form factor (with flat top, so your sandwich does not slide off when batch scanning).

In all this add each sample performance, which can vary quite widely, with some needing much more tweaking to get to same/similar result. Applies to all of them.

Let me know what I'm mistaken about. I never bothered upgrading from a 4490 to an 850 because all tests and sample images I saw online told me there was no increase in resolution.

And if that's not true, you can hardly blame me, as Epson has always deliberately misrepresented its resolution figures and left it to the public to try to figure out...

 

[Hassasin]

Let me know what I'm mistaken about. I never bothered upgrading from a 4490 to an 850 because all tests and sample images I saw online told me there was no increase in resolution.

And if that's not true, you can hardly blame me, as Epson has always deliberately misrepresented its resolution figures and left it to the public to try to figure out...

I have never seen a test for 4490 that would suggest it is on par with 4890/4990 and the follow ups of 700/800 series. 4490 was succeeded by 500/600 scanners, both also never came all that close to their bigger sisters.

Granted I have not used 4490 either, but have the 600 and have no idea how any test would show 'same" results to bigger guys. The only "explanation" I can think of is bad luck with samples used, as that is the biggest problem, especially, flatbeds, piece to piece vary quite a bit in actual quality delivered and need lots tinkering to get better, in some cases impossible if hardware is that much off specs in alignment.

If you are only referring to 35mm scanning performance then I think it is not fair at all to even start talking. They all do well enough for quick scans, none was ever built to do what dedicated 35mm scanners do.