Epson 4870 and Nikon LS 50

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mike Engles
  • Start date Start date
M

Mike Engles

Hello

I have just got a Epson 4870 and a Nikon LS50.
You might be interested in a comparison.

This link is to screen grab.

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/compare.jpg

The top image is from a LS50, no cleaning or sharpening, just levels at
4000 DPI.
The bottom is from a Epson 4870, no cleaning or sharpening,but levels
and bringing up the saturation to match. Scanned at 4800 and downsampled
to 4000.

The LS50 captures the little spots of fine dirt, or could be mould,the
Epson does not see this at all. Could be the type of illumination.

It is quite clear that the Epson has barely 2000DPi of resolution,
assuming there is nothing wrong with it.

As a experiment I down sampled the Nikon image to 2000 DPI and then
upsampled back to 4000DPI. The Nikon still had it.

I bought the Epson to scan my medium format slides.
Ice works very well with E6 slides,but is very slow compared to the
Nikon.
16 mins to do a scan at 4800. The Nikon takes 3 or 4 mins at 4000DPI.
ICE on the Epson does not work very well with cleaning flatbed images,
but surprisingly well with Kodachromes.

Actually I think it does a better job with Kodachromes than the Nikon,
again possibly because of the type of illumination. I might post a
similar comparison.

On the whole I would say that the Epson is pretty good. You need to take
the resolution claims with a very large pinch of salt. It is not a bad
scanner for medium format, and ICE is really a usefull extra.

THE EPSON DOES A LOT OF WARMING UP, which really does contribute to its
slowness.

Mike Engles
 
Just as an aside to the comparrison... I scanned a 6x9cm negative at 3200
dpi and the subsequent print I had done is 60" wide. There is some noise in
the shot but I think that is acceptable, considering the size. It was
interpolated up to print size and done on a Lambda, digital printer. My
experiences do not produce the same out of focus rsults as your Mike.

Douglas
 
Douglas said:
Just as an aside to the comparrison... I scanned a 6x9cm negative at 3200
dpi and the subsequent print I had done is 60" wide. There is some noise in
the shot but I think that is acceptable, considering the size. It was
interpolated up to print size and done on a Lambda, digital printer. My
experiences do not produce the same out of focus rsults as your Mike.

Douglas
Click to expand...


Hello

In that case I have a faulty scanner.
I assume you are talking about the Epson.
The image is in a 35mm slide holder, sitting on the scanner glass.

It would be interesting to see if anyone else has the same reaction.
There is a image on this site that loks pretty blurry,but then so does
the overview.

http://www.terrapinphoto.com/jmdavis/VENICE_II.jpg

Mike Engles
 
Of course my experience was all with 120 roll film.
So I scanned some 35mm 400 ASA Fuji NPS to see how it looks. What I
discovered was a little surprising. There seems to be 2 schools in this
group. One which swears by Vuescan and the other which uses the scanner
manufacturer provided software. I have both.

Vuescan produces scans not unlike the Nikon example of yours while the
Epsonscan produces the slightly fuzzy scan. I don't have time right now but
I will post the images sometime after midday (GMT +10 hours). The Epsonscan
software has an ongoing problem with me. I've changed enough parts in my PC
to say I've replaced it and still cannot use ICE at 4800 dpi and 48 bit
mode.

Vuescan just does the scan, faster and at full resolution but Vuescan
doesn't handle colour anywhere near as well as Epsonscan. I am right in the
middle of an article on this scanner and I have to go to work for a while.
(Boo Hoo) but when I return I'll post the results of my scanner on my
gallery.

Douglas
(www.technoaussie.com)
 
In that case I have a faulty scanner.
I assume you are talking about the Epson.
Click to expand...

Compared to the resolution chart tests I have done (see my post earlier
today), your scanner looks normal for these scanners.

Doug
 
Douglas said:
Of course my experience was all with 120 roll film.
So I scanned some 35mm 400 ASA Fuji NPS to see how it looks. What I
discovered was a little surprising. There seems to be 2 schools in this
group. One which swears by Vuescan and the other which uses the scanner
manufacturer provided software. I have both.

Vuescan produces scans not unlike the Nikon example of yours while the
Epsonscan produces the slightly fuzzy scan. I don't have time right now but
I will post the images sometime after midday (GMT +10 hours). The Epsonscan
software has an ongoing problem with me. I've changed enough parts in my PC
to say I've replaced it and still cannot use ICE at 4800 dpi and 48 bit
mode.

Vuescan just does the scan, faster and at full resolution but Vuescan
doesn't handle colour anywhere near as well as Epsonscan. I am right in the
middle of an article on this scanner and I have to go to work for a while.
(Boo Hoo) but when I return I'll post the results of my scanner on my
gallery.

Douglas
(www.technoaussie.com)
Click to expand...


Hello

I don't think it is the Epson focussing.
I have just noticed that with an image without ICE the little dust and
hairs on the glass are very well focussed.
I do not think that the Epson 4870 is really any better than 2400 DPI. I
really do like the scanner.
I also think that there is a big problem with NikonScan 4 and the LS50,
with Kodachromes. The Epson and Vuescan do a better job.

I never imagined I would say that, as I have been trying the various
iterations of Vuescan since version 0.1. I have never been a fan of it.

Nevertheless Nikonsscan cannot be beaten when scanning E6 films or C41
negatives.

Mike Engles
 
I don't think it is the Epson focussing.
I have just noticed that with an image without ICE the little dust and
hairs on the glass are very well focussed.
I do not think that the Epson 4870 is really any better than 2400 DPI. I
really do like the scanner.
Click to expand...

Someone over on the EpsonWideFormat list cited
a review where it had been measured at around 1700
dpi, IIRC.
I also think that there is a big problem with NikonScan 4 and the LS50,
with Kodachromes. The Epson and Vuescan do a better job.

I never imagined I would say that, as I have been trying the various
iterations of Vuescan since version 0.1. I have never been a fan of it.
Click to expand...

I give Ed huge credit for having excellent service
and working hard to port Vuescan to every scanner
under the sun. Nevertheless - I have never been
able to truly abide by its bizarre interface, or lack
of the controls that I've grown used to in other
scanner drivers. I guess, to really get the most
from it said:
Nevertheless Nikonsscan cannot be beaten when scanning E6 films or C41
negatives.
Click to expand...

IMO, NikonScan is one of the best vendor-supplied
scanner drivers going. Annoying quirks and bugs here
and there, but it does the basics very well. In any case,
it's the devil I know.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com
 
Raphael said:
Someone over on the EpsonWideFormat list cited
a review where it had been measured at around 1700
dpi, IIRC.


I give Ed huge credit for having excellent service
and working hard to port Vuescan to every scanner
under the sun. Nevertheless - I have never been
able to truly abide by its bizarre interface, or lack
of the controls that I've grown used to in other
scanner drivers. I guess, to really get the most


IMO, NikonScan is one of the best vendor-supplied
scanner drivers going. Annoying quirks and bugs here
and there, but it does the basics very well. In any case,
it's the devil I know.

rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com
Click to expand...


Hello
I cannot disagree with you.
I do feel that the new LS50/Nikonssan and Kodachromes is not as good as
it should be.
My Epson and LS50/Vuescan seem to do a better job.
That is just in the ability to give shadows that are not blue.
I have really taken to the Epson. The basic scans are quite dull, but
can be tweaked up pretty well. Judicious sharpening is also very
effective.
At this link there is a resolution comparison between the Epson and
LS50.

http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/compare2.jpg
http://www.btinternet.com/~mike.engles/mike/compare3.jpg

Use them on your site if you wish.

I think I will do one for the Epson at different resolutions, using the
same test image.

Mike Engles
 
In that case I have a faulty scanner.
Click to expand...

The pepper effect of the Nikon Coolscan is well documented. Your scanner is
not faulty.

The Epson 3200 scanner has a real resolution of about 1200dpi and the Epson
4870 has a real resolution of about 1650 dpi acording to German magazine
Color Foto and C't.
 
Back
Top