[Shuttershane]

hey guys,

I am thinking about picking up a 645n along with a epson v750. I wanted to get an idea of how well this scanner scans 645 film. I usually print 16x20 and 22x30. Could someone here link me a full res scans so I can print out a few test images to get an idea? I know I can drum scan but that option is way to expensive in the long run. FYI feel free to leave watermarks on if your worried, this is just for my own testing.

[Venturi]

stevebrot uses a V700 and has worked about every angle possible with scanners. He'd probably give the best demonstration of what it can do.
If you want to see what a noob on the V700 can do, I'll have mine on Wednesday.

You can buy a refurbed Epson V500 (aka open box return) with full Epson warranty & free shipping for $99 from EpsonEpson Perfection V500 Photo Scanner - Refurbished, Overview - Product Information - Epson America, Inc.

With the money you save, you can buy really good 120 film holders & glass from Custom film holders for Agfa, Microtek, Canon and Epson film scanners. and a copy of Vue Scan Pro. VueScan Scanner Software for Windows 7, Mac OS X Lion, Linux, iPhone, iPad, iPod

Its all you need for 120 Negs or Transparencies. If you have to have an Epson 700 or 750 that will do 8x10 negatives, watch the Epson site and they will occasionally have refurb versions.

I quit using film a few years ago but do restoration work and occasionally get negatives. I did a 16x20 print for a customers from the original 120 B&W negative. No idea what camera was used. I have a testimonial on my site from the customer because the print was much better than the originals from a pro lab, My 4 year old re-furbed Epson v500 bought for $148 shipped to my door still gets it done. I keep waiting for a customer to bring me a pile of 8x10 negatives to justify a v700 but am still waiting.

[Steinback]

Your digital processing of the scans will have a huge impact on the final result (sharpness, etc.). I'm working with a V500 at the moment, and you are welcome to reprocess and print any of these if nobody offers you V750 files:

Pentax 645 - a set on Flickr

At least a couple of them are scanned in the 4k x 5k pixel range since I generally stick with 2400 DPI scans for medium format. I scan with all options turned off except ICE on C41 film, then do my sharpening and colour adjustment in GIMP. If you want to see what unprocessed 3600 DPI scans on the V500 looks like I have another roll I should be scanning in the next couple of days. For the sizes you are scanning and printing at the V700 and V750 would be a better, if quite a bit more expensive, choice.

[Smolk]

Hi Shuttershane, did you not have a 645D?

If serious about scanning, one of the old flatbed professional scanners would also be interesting. Huge, and with the problem of support, but far better than any Epson, CoolScan and Imacon (iQsmart, Screen Cezanne, the like).

[Shuttershane]

Smolk,

Yes I do have a 645D. I love it. I just want to work with film again....but I also want to make sure its worth my time. I can easily print large with my 645D....heck I can sometimes pull off 20x30's for my wife and she uses a 5D MKII.

Hopefully Stevebrot will post some examples

[desertscape]

I agree with Smolk on the Pro flat beds. Another option is to have your scanning subcontracted. I have my 6x7 slides scanned by a Heidelberg Topaz, flat bed. It is a top of the line flat bed and I must admit that its results surprised me. It is better than the Nikon CoolScan 9000. The price per slide is the lowest you will find. If interested, send me a note. This scanning business is in the San Francisco area.

[stevebrot]

stevebrot uses a V700 and has worked about every angle possible with scanners. He'd probably give the best demonstration of what it can do.
If you want to see what a noob on the V700 can do, I'll have mine on Wednesday.

Ha! Ha! Every possible angle? Fat chance!

I do have a V700, however, and have scanned negs from a 645N with it. As noted on this site and elsewhere, the V700 and V750 are really only good for about 2400 dpi. Now before you get too discouraged, consider that you really don't need to go with super-high resolution to get very reasonable scans for digital display or printing. Calculate the megapixels at 2400 dpi (945 dpcm) and you may be pleasantly surprised (945 * 6 * 945 * 4.5 = ~24 megapixels).

I don't have any full-resolution (4800 dpi) examples from a 120 negative (my version of Lightroom will not handle that large a file on my computer), but I can show you a full-resolution crop from a 35mm negative as a direct comparison with my Nikon 5000 ED:

Original full-frame...(scanned on the Nikon)


First comparing the two at 2400 dpi...


Next at 4000 dpi...


(Both from the same TMax 100 negative)

If you want higher resolution for a large display print, have it done by the pros on a Hassy (Imacon) or Nikon or a drum (superb dynamic range with a drum).

As for my scans...Here is a link to a few of the shots I did when I had use of a 645N for a month this last summer. All were scanned on the V700 and none above 2400 dpi. (I think most were scanned to TIFF at 600 - 1000 dpi with the intent of publishing to the Web.)

Fotostevia: Pentax 645N on Flickr

The examples are not the best (I was learning to use the camera/lenses), but as you might note, the larger negative gives essentially grainless scan or optical print and great tonality. Having made that point, even better than 645 format is 6x7 or 4x5! Here is an Epson V700 scan of an Ektar 100 6x7 negative scanned at about 1000 dpi and downsampled to display size.


Chamonix 045-N2, Caltar II-N 150/5.6


Steve

(Would really like to have a 6x7 camera with the handling characteristics of the 645N...Get a Mamiya 7 or a Voigtlander Bessa III, you say? Do I look rich?)

[chicagonature]

Shuttershane,

I use a lab called AGX Imaging out of Sault St. Marie, Michigan. His prices are great and he scans 645 using a Hasselblad (Imacon) scanner at 4000dpi and 35mm film at up to 8000dpi. It's very high quality at a fantastic price. Talk to Mike and tell him Mike MacDonald sent you.

Honestly, I have a Nikon 9000 and it does a fantastic job. But, I've stopped using it unless I need a fast scan for a client. Having to clean off 6 surfaces (4 glass and 2 film) and getting it perfectly oriented into the glass holder, then scanning at 8x or 16x, it's just not worth the time and hassle. So, I simply have AGX take care of things for me. The Hasselblad is a "virtual" drum scanner with a CCD sensor. You'll get drum scan results in most, if not all, case. The results will be in a different league as the Epson scanner plus you'll have a learning curve. Scanning isn't hard, but you'll need to gain experience. I love my Nikon scanner, but I much rather use the lab in order to save me time. The price is right.

[tuco]

...
Honestly, I have a Nikon 9000 and it does a fantastic job. But, I've stopped using it unless I need a fast scan for a client. Having to clean off 6 surfaces (4 glass and 2 film) and getting it perfectly oriented into the glass holder,

I have the 9000ED. Why perfectly aligned? You place it in, straighten minor alignment in the image editor or scanning software. And it is anything but fast. 15 minutes for a 6x7 with multi-sampling set to 4 (set to 16 also with multi-pass set is 1 forever and 2 eternities) on VueScan using the IEEE 1394 interface.

[Shuttershane]

Wow I was actually looking at the Nikon 8000 ED...you can get these used for way cheaper than the Nikon 9000 ED. If this thing can actually push out a good quality 4000dpi scan then we are looking at 60+ megapixels.

Does anyone know if this scanner will work in OSX?

[Paul MaudDib]

3-4 minutes per pass isn't terrible for real 4000 DPI scans. It's faster than a drum scan and much much faster than sending out to a lab. Apparently back in the day they would scan the same image three times with a R/G/B filter on the lens to save money. Now that had to take a while.

And the good thing about it being an hour is you can set a timer and go do something else while it's scanning. Process the image completely while the next one is scanning or something. I hate the fact that my V500 only holds one 6x7 or 6x9 negative at a time, it's fast enough I can't get involved in something else but slow enough that the time adds up. I gotta trade up to a V700 one of these days for my own sanity.

[tuco]

Does anyone know if this [8000ED] scanner will work in OSX?

It depends on your Mac. The scanner has a Firewire (IEEE 1394) interface. Mac's a few years ago all had a Firewire port but now I think it only comes on MacBook Pro and Mac Pro for the newest models.

And if the OEM scanning software does not work you can always use a third party such as VueScan, which you can try for free, and it has a comprehensive list of supported scanners. The 8000ED is on the list. It is multi platform scanning software. And its interface is made more for the programmers trying to support multi platforms than for the user. But that becomes pretty inconsequential over time.

[chicagonature]

I have the 9000ED. Why perfectly aligned? You place it in, straighten minor alignment in the image editor or scanning software. And it is anything but fast. 15 minutes for a 6x7 with multi-sampling set to 4 (set to 16 also with multi-pass set is 1 forever and 2 eternities) on VueScan using the IEEE 1394 interface.

Well, to place the film "squarely" in the holder and not lose any of the image is tedious. And, then there's the dust and 6 surfaces (glass holder and film) that need to be clean. What a pain.

I still need to scan at least couple hundred more transparencies. I can spend the time and scan my life away or pay for someone a low price to do it. I've already paid for my scanner in savings from all the scans I've done in the past.