Epson v750 still worth it?

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Having just bought a rolleiflex, and not having a possibility for a darkroom, scanning is my destiny.

I can ask the lab, but prefer to do it myself, especially as I have still so many negatives somewhere.

would the v750 be a could buy (400€), or do I need the latest?

thanks

[250swb]

It’s pretty good for medium format, and 35mm digital contact sheets. But if you have a DSLR that’s got more than 24mp I think you’d be better spending the money on a light tablet, a macro lens, a neg carrier, and a cheap copy stand. Congrats on your Rolleiflex!

[TomB_tx]

I've used a V750 with quite good results on 120 film, but it does better with an aftermarket (ANR glass) negative carrier that holds film flatter. The 850 comes with improved carriers.

[spydrxx]

If you already have a good DSLR and macro lens I'd skip the scanner. I mean it is the same thing, converting an analog image to digital.

Edited August 14, 2023 by spydrxx
Added the last sentence

[Warton]

As others said you could be better off with a Macro lens if you have a DSLR (most of us do have I assume).

I went to the same path as you are going. Did a bit research and had my eyes on Epson 750, but further research tells me it's not worth the money especially I have a Nikon D810 and Macro 60mm lens already. I just spent $80 purchasing a Nikon negative holders kit and it went perfectly.

More importantly in this process is the lighting source

[Olaf_ZG]

Thanks all for reply. I don’t have a dslr, so a scanner will be. 

[Xícara de Café]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My 2 cents:

When I was in your position, considering getting a scanner and without a DSLR, I opted for a second-hand full-frame Nikon DSLR as I already had a set of extension tubes for my Nikon F cameras and a Micro-Nikkor 55mm Ais lens. The tubes which work with the Micro lens are the Nikon PK13 (27.5mm extension for digitising 35mm), PK 12 (14mm for medium format) and the 11A (8mm for larger fotmats (??)). I also have a "Pixl-Latr" negative holder/diffusor (www.pixl-latr.com) and although you can use daylight with this to digitise negs/transparencies, I use a cheap white-colour temperature LED panel (the type you might install in your kitchen) as a lighting board. I use "Darktable" software to process the captured images.

I also needed a DSLR for making videos and documenting things quickly and cheaply, so it was a win win situation for me, especially since the DSLR was much cheaper than the scanner.

The other thing to consider, since you have perhaps many other negatives to scan, is that a DSLR is much faster to work with than a scanner.

All the best with your choice!

Edited August 15, 2023 by Xícara de Café

[Olaf_ZG]

Thanks all, bought the v750 on the local Ebay. A dlsr wasn’t an option, as knowing me, many additional lenses would follow 😇

[Steve Ricoh]

On 8/15/2023 at 7:21 PM, Olaf_ZG said:

Thanks all, bought the v750 on the local Ebay. A dlsr wasn’t an option, as knowing me, many additional lenses would follow 😇

At one stage I considered a 2nd hand Epson but then I read about dust and outgassing underneath the glass. I couldn’t be bothered or brave enough to do this:

https://www.lomography.com/magazine/141581-cleaning-the-internal-glass-of-an-epson-scanner
I recommend that you check yours out within the terms of eBay, ie description and misrepresentation.

I hope yours is good, not needing an internal clean.

[250swb]

5 hours ago, Steve Ricoh said:

At one stage I considered a 2nd hand Epson but then I read about dust and outgassing underneath the glass. I couldn’t be bothered or brave enough to do this:

With a V700 etc. it’s unscrewing four screws, take the top off and clean the glass, people spend more time loading a film.

[bevdig]

I think it is ridiculous to compare a scanner such as the Epson 750 to scanning a negative with a DSLR. A camera is a camera, not a scanner. I use a 750 routinely with excellent results. For the best scan, I use the wet mount system; for less critical scans, I load up the holders. With some simple testing, you can adjust the holder height to give the sharpest result. Enough said.

[jakontil]

On 8/15/2023 at 2:48 AM, 250swb said:

It’s pretty good for medium format, and 35mm digital contact sheets. But if you have a DSLR that’s got more than 24mp I think you’d be better spending the money on a light tablet, a macro lens, a neg carrier, and a cheap copy stand. Congrats on your Rolleiflex!

Im doing something wrong with medium format and dslr scanning that my frames seem to suffer from either reflections or lens vignettes 

hence I’d always go back to my V600 for the task.. however for 135, it’s 👍 perfect

[250swb]

5 hours ago, jakontil said:

Im doing something wrong with medium format and dslr scanning that my frames seem to suffer from either reflections or lens vignettes 

hence I’d always go back to my V600 for the task.. however for 135, it’s 👍 perfect

What is your equipment setup and how are you using it? Reflections and vignetting should be easy enough to track down, poor illumination or the wrong lens for the job maybe? 

[jakontil]

20 minutes ago, 250swb said:

What is your equipment setup and how are you using it? Reflections and vignetting should be easy enough to track down, poor illumination or the wrong lens for the job maybe? 

Hi steve, i started to have nikkor 60mm micro and 105 micro, only used once on each havent got the time to explore more but struggling on both occasions with 120 scanning with 60mm being the worse with reflections and all on the negs allegedly

using the EFH holder and viltrox 116t for light source which should suffice but i might be wrong 

[250swb]

1 hour ago, jakontil said:

Hi steve, i started to have nikkor 60mm micro and 105 micro, only used once on each havent got the time to explore more but struggling on both occasions with 120 scanning with 60mm being the worse with reflections and all on the negs allegedly

using the EFH holder and viltrox 116t for light source which should suffice but i might be wrong 

I suspect it may be your Viltrox 116T that is the problem, but do check. It seems it's primary use is to illuminate subjects for still life photography and if it's anything like the similar type I have for still life the LEDs are bright but not especially closely packed, so when you lay a negative flat on it as a back lit illumination source the camera is picking out the bright LEDs rather than having a smooth even light source. For example if I use mine with a small aperture and close to the subject I will see reflections of the grid of LEDs in highlights.  It's not the same thing as a Kaiser SlimLite Plano which is intended to be laid flat on a desk and provide an even illumination for negatives, either for viewing or for copying.

https://www.speedgraphic.co.uk/light_panels__viewers/kaiser_2453_slimlite_plano_medium_led_light_panel/29032_p.html

 

[Bikie John]

I have an Epson V750 which is quite old now, and find it extremely useful for doing bulk scans of 35mm negs and slides. I am not aiming for quality, more to get fairly low-resolution files to use as an online "contact sheet". It does this really well, and using Adobe Bridge is a very useful way to quickly look through what you've got. 

I have also used it to scan a few medium format negs with excellent results. To get the best out of 35mm (I know, this is not what Olaf asked  ) I think other methods are better - dedicated film scanner or duplicating with a camera, according to taste.

@Olaf_ZG - if you have ordered it anyway, enjoy it. It is a good general-purpose scanner and might turn out to be more useful and versatile than you think!

John