Epson V850 Discontinued?

[koraks]

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.

What kind of tests are we looking at, anyway?
I've done some googling, but only very quick & dirty. One thing that comes up is this set of test scans: https://flickr.com/photos/mikecostolo/albums/72157594426285173/
The interpretation depends vastly on the criteria you apply. If I apply the informal criterion of 'the last set that visibly shows differentiation between the lines', I arrive at an effective resolution slightly shy of 2000dpi when scanning at 9600 or 4800dpi. That doesn't seem too vastly different from what the 4990 manages, which is supposedly around 2200dpi on a sunny day going downhill with a soft breeze in the back.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

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.

Differences between V800 and V850

Epson V800 vs V850 — The 5 Differences and Which You Should Buy

Differences clearly explained between the Epson V800 Photo and V850 Pro scanners. Helps buying by comparing image quality, speed, included software.

www.scanyourentirelife.com

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

My V850 seems to do a better job than my V600 especially with 35mm film. Note that the V600 doesn't scan large format film, only 35mm and 120.

 

[Archiloque]

The internet consensus about V550/V600 and V700/800/850, is that the former scan at around 1500dpi and the later around 2200/2400dpi. It's a noticeable difference but it's short of spectacular.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Too bad. I have been very happy with the Epson V850. Previously I had the 4490 scanner.

 

[_T_]

I think there might be a lot of variation from unit to unit in both the pro and consumer lines of epson scanners such that the worst of the high end are on par with the majority of the consumer scanners and the best of the consumer scanners are on par with the majority of the high end scanners.

That said I think most of the variation comes down to the object distance to which the scanners are calibrated and so most of it can be accounted for by raising or lowering the negative. Though I have seen reports of both lines being miscalibrated with the plane of sharp focus somewhere below the surface of the scan bed.

I have seen very few in depth, technical reviews of resolution mention finding the plane of sharp focus prior to testing so I tend to believe that much of the data available is experimentally flawed and little representative of what a motivated end user can achieve.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The internet consensus about V550/V600 and V700/800/850, is that the former scan at around 1500dpi and the later around 2200/2400dpi. It's a noticeable difference but it's short of spectacular.

The dMax is better on the V850 I believe 4.0 vs. 3.4.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

Many of the manufacturers seem to struggle with building good holders that will keep the film properly flat, especially for medium format. Funny enough, the best factory medium format holders I've personally used were what came with my first scanner in ~2007, a thoroughly consumer grade Canon(8400F maybe?) that was $200 or so new from CompUSA.

The Epson holders not only struggle with film flatness, but also scanner to scanner variability in optimum focus. It would seem to me as though the scanners have little to no autofocus range on the film scanning lens.

Using the factory adjustment Epson provides makes a huge difference(with some trial and error to get it right) but it's still less than great as there are only 3 adjustment positions.

The BetterScanning holder not only gave me better film flatness, but by using grub screws for feet that can be adjusted a fraction of a turn at a time, you can really dial in optimum focus. When I first got my holder, I spent the better part of a couple of hours testing, adjusting, and retesting but it was well worth it when I finally got it there. Unfortunately, the last time I saw any discussion of this particular holder, it seemed as though they were no longer available.

I suspect, though, that both flatness and focus issues are at the root of some of the variations you see reported on all of the 8x10 format Epson scanners.

I did buy the fluid bed for my V700 also, which I believe was included with the V750 but an optional purchase for all other models. IMO, it's an accessory well worth having, even if you do use it dry. Among other advantages it lets you scan all kinds of oddball sizes that don't fit in the standard holders, but lets you do so with the high resolution film lens rather than the standard platen-height lens.

Incidentally, I didn't think it was possible, but Nikon's standard 120 holder for the 8000/9000 is even worse than Epson's. I don't think I got a truly edge-to-edge sharp scan from my 8000 unitl I bought Stephan Scharff's modular holder(and I now have his fluid holder in addition to the standard glass/glassless masked one). Fortunately too, as long as you keep the film flat, Nikon managed to get a pretty broad range of focus so you don't have to worry about positioning as much as with the Epsons.

 

[brbo]

The Epson holders not only struggle with film flatness, but also scanner to scanner variability in optimum focus. It would seem to me as though the scanners have little to no autofocus range on the film scanning lens.

Epson flatbeds (same as many others) don't have autofocus.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Many of the manufacturers seem to struggle with building good holders that will keep the film properly flat, especially for medium format. Funny enough, the best factory medium format holders I've personally used were what came with my first scanner in ~2007, a thoroughly consumer grade Canon(8400F maybe?) that was $200 or so new from CompUSA.

The Epson holders not only struggle with film flatness, but also scanner to scanner variability in optimum focus. It would seem to me as though the scanners have little to no autofocus range on the film scanning lens.

Using the factory adjustment Epson provides makes a huge difference(with some trial and error to get it right) but it's still less than great as there are only 3 adjustment positions.

The BetterScanning holder not only gave me better film flatness, but by using grub screws for feet that can be adjusted a fraction of a turn at a time, you can really dial in optimum focus. When I first got my holder, I spent the better part of a couple of hours testing, adjusting, and retesting but it was well worth it when I finally got it there. Unfortunately, the last time I saw any discussion of this particular holder, it seemed as though they were no longer available.

I suspect, though, that both flatness and focus issues are at the root of some of the variations you see reported on all of the 8x10 format Epson scanners.

I did buy the fluid bed for my V700 also, which I believe was included with the V750 but an optional purchase for all other models. IMO, it's an accessory well worth having, even if you do use it dry. Among other advantages it lets you scan all kinds of oddball sizes that don't fit in the standard holders, but lets you do so with the high resolution film lens rather than the standard platen-height lens.

Incidentally, I didn't think it was possible, but Nikon's standard 120 holder for the 8000/9000 is even worse than Epson's. I don't think I got a truly edge-to-edge sharp scan from my 8000 unitl I bought Stephan Scharff's modular holder(and I now have his fluid holder in addition to the standard glass/glassless masked one). Fortunately too, as long as you keep the film flat, Nikon managed to get a pretty broad range of focus so you don't have to worry about positioning as much as with the Epsons.

My V850 film holders have 5 positions for focus which works well. The lens is factory calibrated to focus on the 3mm default setting on the film holders. I did find one holder that worked better one notch setting off that. There is also glass to hold the film flat. But that adds to dust.

The biggest problem I find with 120 holders is that the V850s only holds two 6x7 not three like my V600 does. SO you can;t cut and store 120 6x7 film into 3-3-2-2 into those plastic sheets. Film already cut into three shot strips won't fit the V850 holders. You have to recut them down to 2-1.

Also, on their 4x5 holders, some film has to be trimmed on the edge to fit properly. You'd think after all the years making scanners, Epson would have gotten holders right.