I have a Minolta DMSE 5400. It's rather amazing with better than 90 lp/mm resolution. Files from this scanner look terrific printed natively 16x24 at 300 dpi and can readily be interpolated larger. I am confident that the best portfolio work that I've done in 35mm is at or above 90 lp/mm shooting (as when shooting my Pentax primes).
Don't have a V750, but V750 users almost universally mention that they won't print bigger than 16x20 from it-- when scanning 4x5!. So if you think you can get a 645 scan with a flatbed like the Epson V750 that will beat the best that the MDSE can do, you're probably going to be sorely disappointed.
I've been holding off on a Nikon CoolScan 9000 because I don't think it even it will significantly improve on the resolution with just 645 scans v. the DMSE 5400 from 135. Film area doesn't mean a whole lot, it's linear resolution that matters. Scanner resolution can also be restricted if your lenses can't achieve better. The Coolscan captures nearly 67 ppi... which is likely already beyond the upper limits of some number of P645 lenses.
An Imacon doesn't have ICE, incidentally. For that kind of cost, and the time spend dustbusting your scans, l'd rather get a good used drumscanner and wet-mount for the better defect handling and lower noise. (Good drum scanners are now selling for about what a Coolscan 9000 costs.)
If I shot more 6x7 or 6x9, the Coolscan might make more sense. But to have three scanners just to do what one drum scanner does better--for less money--really doesn't make any sense at all.
Last edited by Ivan J. Eberle; 05-17-2010 at 06:55 PM.