scanner: v330 or 700f?

[mansio]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i understand from some of the technical reviews their spec seems to be equal in both resolution and dynamic range, but in experience which one do you guys like better?

 

if possible please provide some scan samples

 

thanks

[250swb]

For scanning 35mm, or do you want to scan your gas bill?

 

If it is your gas bill either will be OK, but for 35mm both are inferior to a Plustek scanner. It isn't so much the dpi you can scan at, but the quality of the lens in the scanner that makes flatbeds poor for 35mm. Even an Epson V700 which is wonderful at medium or large format struggles to match a Plustek for 35mm scans. The Plustek's you see are all essentially the same scanner with or without the ability to do dust removal, and/or software improvements. So if you are only doing scans from B&W negatives for instance the lowest priced one with the software of your choice would be fine as you can't use dust removal with B&W negative films anyway, (and it degrades the image with colour as well).

 

Steve

[Doc Henry]

For scanning 35mm, or do you want to scan your gas bill?

 

If it is your gas bill either will be OK, but for 35mm both are inferior to a Plustek scanner. It isn't so much the dpi you can scan at, but the quality of the lens in the scanner that makes flatbeds poor for 35mm. Even an Epson V700 which is wonderful at medium or large format struggles to match a Plustek for 35mm scans. The Plustek's you see are all essentially the same scanner with or without the ability to do dust removal, and/or software improvements. So if you are only doing scans from B&W negatives for instance the lowest priced one with the software of your choice would be fine as you can't use dust removal with B&W negative films anyway, (and it degrades the image with colour as well).

 

Steve

Hi Steve,

How are you ?

 

I agree with Steve

Mansio, look at this thread (Steve also have posted some examples) :

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/160651-epson-v700-750-very-good-our.html

Regards

Henry

[mansio]

For scanning 35mm, or do you want to scan your gas bill?

 

If it is your gas bill either will be OK, but for 35mm both are inferior to a Plustek scanner. It isn't so much the dpi you can scan at, but the quality of the lens in the scanner that makes flatbeds poor for 35mm. Even an Epson V700 which is wonderful at medium or large format struggles to match a Plustek for 35mm scans. The Plustek's you see are all essentially the same scanner with or without the ability to do dust removal, and/or software improvements. So if you are only doing scans from B&W negatives for instance the lowest priced one with the software of your choice would be fine as you can't use dust removal with B&W negative films anyway, (and it degrades the image with colour as well).

 

Steve

i love the humor, thanks

 

i also looked into plustek after i posted my silly questions and it seems to be much(much) better than any flatbed solution indeed. the problem though is that they don't play well with medium format, but apparently only v330 of the two could potentially deal with that through diy

means

 

so for the price i guess there's really no option for me and i should add that if i somehow score a master piece in the foreseeable near future i do have access a nikon 9000

 

one step at a time i guess...

 

thanks

[250swb]

I think you need a V700, even if a second hand or refurb. Scanning isn't a fast process, and you may as well do it right once rather than scan a whole lot of work and then have to do it again when you eventually get a scanner better than a V330. A V700 will do great MF, contact sheets in all formats, and 35mm up to a good web standard. So at least you can get on with archiving and MF, posting 35mm, and think about a dedicated 35mm scanner later.

 

Steve

[erl]

Steves comments are pretty much right on. I know nothing of the Plustek, but the V700 is fine for contact sheets, hopeless for 35mm and mediocre at best for MF.

 

I have and use the V700 for contact sheets and gas bills. Excellent for that. Compared to the Nikon 8000 which I have (early brother of Nikon 9000) it is unsatisfactory. If you shoot MF you are presumably looking for a high level of quality. The V700 falls short, IMO.

 

The Nikon 5000 is excellent for 35mm, which I also have, and is fast. To do better than the Nikons you have spend 'real' money, but the gear is there if you want it.

[gbealnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Some sage advice here, and at the expense of hijacking the thread I'll ask a question too.

I am slowly getting back into B&W, 35mm only (at this stage anyway). I have a used Plustech, and am slowly learning to drive it.

I would like to produce a contact sheet, but right now it seems the only way is to buy a flatbed scanner, is this correct?

Gary.

[250swb]

I would disagree that the V700 is mediocre for MF, compared against my Minolta Multi Pro, a scanner easily on a par with the Nikon 9000, the scans are pretty well indistinguishable. Only with high contrast where the V700's DR is lower than the Minolta does it struggle, but in terms of resolution it is spot on. It does make a difference to properly calibrate the height of the holder, for which a Betterscanning MF holder is ideal, and which can be adjusted in fine increments. On going you can process film to suit the DR of the scanner just as one did by processing film to suit the enlarger.

 

Steve

[250swb]

Some sage advice here, and at the expense of hijacking the thread I'll ask a question too.

I am slowly getting back into B&W, 35mm only (at this stage anyway). I have a used Plustech, and am slowly learning to drive it.

I would like to produce a contact sheet, but right now it seems the only way is to buy a flatbed scanner, is this correct?

Gary.

 

You don't need a flatbed for digital contact sheets, its just that the V700 has holders that can scan four film strips at a time, producing thumbnails or larger images fairly quickly. With a Plustek you have to push each film strip through one at a time, but if you set the dpi to 800 and a 6x4 size it can still be fairly quick to make a folder of images good enough to decide which are the good ones, which are in focus etc.

 

Steve

[erl]

I would disagree that the V700 is mediocre for MF, compared against my Minolta Multi Pro, a scanner easily on a par with the Nikon 9000, the scans are pretty well indistinguishable. Only with high contrast where the V700's DR is lower than the Minolta does it struggle, but in terms of resolution it is spot on. It does make a difference to properly calibrate the height of the holder, for which a Betterscanning MF holder is ideal, and which can be adjusted in fine increments. On going you can process film to suit the DR of the scanner just as one did by processing film to suit the enlarger.

 

Steve

Steve, I find your comments interesting. I have no experience of the Minolta so cannot judge it, whether comparable to the Nikon or not. My only experience of comparison, fairly brief and enough to satisfy me, is between the V700 and 8000. I was disappointed to find the V700 noticeably lacking compared to the Nikon 8000. Quite possibly my technique is lacking wrt the V700. I am very experienced with the 8000. Would you be of the opinion that the Betterscanning MF holders are essential or desirable to squeeze the ultimate from the V700?

 

I must say I am a skeptic, but not unconvincible. Since I have put my money up, I would be pleased to find it was worthwhile beyond what I have experienced so far.

[250swb]

I don't think the Betterscanning holders are essential if the standard adjustment system happens to be spot on. The catch is you are never quite sure if it is spot on unless you try a fully adjustable holder to see if the scans can be sharper! I found mine a tiny bit off, but still acceptable. You could maybe do tests using small shims of paper as an interim adjustment system.

 

I also found my Minolta gave inevitably very sharp pepper like grain, not at all like film grain that has depth in the emulsion and isn't always pin sharp depending on the film type and developer used. The V700 doesn't do that (straight out of the scanner) but does imo make a closer rendition of film grain as being something that can be sharp, or not so sharp. Grain of course shouldn't be confused with the actual sharpness of the image, which if scanned carefully should be perfectly acceptable from the V700.

 

Steve

[jouhar]

I have a huge archive of MF and 35mm , both negatives and positives, inherited from my grandfather. Some of the material is 70+ years old. I have had good results from the V700, particularly the MF positives, some of which have been subsequently printed 85cm square.

 

I also use a Nikon Coolscan 5000, which is very good for batch scanning of 35mm slides. Of course, the choice of software is important as well.

 

Regards

[fotohuis]

I am scanning for the web with an Epson V500 with betterscanning.com holders. When I want a real good print I am working with wet prints and a Split Grade system. Far superior to any scanner unless you go for an Imacon with 10k+ printer. The only limitation is the format: 40x50cm or 50x60cm in a paper drum. But how often you are going to make an A-1 print ?

[Landberg]

I used to have a v330 and i sucks! I bought a opticscan 8100 and it is waaaaaaaaay better!