Epson 4870 Initial Impressions

  • Thread starter Thread starter David Napierkowski
  • Start date Start date
D

David Napierkowski

I'm impressed. I just set this puppy and and immedaitely ran a few test scans -
transparancies, color negatives and black and white. Outstanding !!! I can see
though where a program like VueScan would be a nnecessity. I'll get better
with this scanning thing as I gain experience with the software but thus far
the screen images of the negatives and transparencies are excellent !!!! The
real proof though would be when I output them to a printer.

Thanks for all the input folks that helped me decide on this scanner.

david N.
 
How good is the focus? I'm thinking about using this scanner for
digitizing 35mm negatives. Is there a way to adjust the focus manually?
 
No, this scanner does not actively focus but relies on a relatively large
depth of field. If your just going to use this for 35 mm and don't have a
need to scan medium format or larger film, you would be happier if you
invest in a dedicated film scanner. Look at the Minolta Dual Scan IV (or
III on closeout) if you are on a budget.

Doug
 
How good is the focus? I'm thinking about using this scanner for
digitizing 35mm negatives. >>
Click to expand...

Focus seems to be fine with the supplied media holders. There is no
independent means of focusing with this scanner.

I've only scanned a few B & W 35 mm negatives mounted in slide holders and a
three - four 35 mm transparancies thus far. Short of a drum scan, I could ask
for anything more of a scanner. With the proper printer these scans should
produce Gallary quality FA prints.

As I've said before I am a tyro when it comes to scanning and things digital.
So I'm only judging things from the basis of 40 years experience as primarily a
B & W photographer and wet darkroom guy.

I'll probably never go completely digital. I simply have too much invested in
my NIkon and Hassy gear. I process my own film in a Jobo film processor so I
have complete control. So just consider me half digital please? <g>

Thanks again

David N
 
If your just going to use this for 35 mm and don't have a
need to scan medium format or larger film,
Click to expand...

I have such a need although 85% of 20,000 plus images are 35mm. As I said I'm a
digital tyro here but the B & W 35mm scans were outstanding.

I balked at going out and buying separate scanners - one exclusively for
slides, the otehr for everything else. Thus far this one does them both very
well indeed. Anything better and I'll get the images drim scanned.

Be well.

David N.
 
David Napierkowski said:
I'll probably never go completely digital.
Click to expand...

Me too !
I simply have too much
invested in my NIkon and Hassy gear. I process my own film in a Jobo
film processor so I have complete control. So just consider me half
digital please? <g>
Click to expand...

The 4870 gives great result for 6x6 scanning ?
 
I'll probably never go completely digital. I simply have too much invested in
my NIkon and Hassy gear. I process my own film in a Jobo film processor so I
have complete control. So just consider me half digital please? <g>
Click to expand...


It's a perfectly reasonable approach.

OTOH, I've had plenty fun with my 10D, on
vacation -- being able to review the day's
photos on the laptop. Or hiking with my G2,
and being able to share the day's photos at
a lean-to with other hikers.

Film is still a fuss and a bother, but there's
a lot of information there, particularly in the
larger formats.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com
 
Film is still a fuss and a bother, but there's
a lot of information there, particularly in the
larger formats. >>
Click to expand...

The great advantage of digital is its immediacy. You get instant feedback and
is great for *show and tell* at the basic level. But you see I ahve it figured
out. if a get that Nikon digital I've been thinking about, I'd also have to get
some extra memory and that darn laptop. I already have too much gear and that
for me gets in the way of actually making images. LOL.

Take care.

David N.

David
 
The great advantage of digital is its immediacy. You get instant feedback and
is great for *show and tell* at the basic level. But you see I ahve it figured
out. if a get that Nikon digital I've been thinking about, I'd also have to get
some extra memory and that darn laptop. I already have too much gear and that
for me gets in the way of actually making images. LOL.
Click to expand...


10D images are actually quite small compared
to even 35 mm film scans.

10D (tiff) = 18 Mbytes
35 mm film scan @4000 dpi = 55 Mbytes
645 film scan @4000 dpi = 160 Mbytes
4x5 film scan @2500 dpi = 300+ Mbytes


But hey, memory is cheap nowadays.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com
 
H i Doug,

I'm looking for the same answer. I have a Epson Prefection 650 that does
well with photos and printed matter. Does your answer to David mean that for
35mm slides the Minolta SD-IV at 3200dpi is better than the 4870 at 4800
dpi? If so, I'll just pick up the SD-IV. Thanks...

Regards,
BobS
 
Even the Minolta Scan Dual III is better than any flatbed for 35mm. The
Epson 4870 real resolution is only about 1600-1650 dpi!!!
 
What you are saying is absolute rubish Andre.
Just because it is written somewhere in a magazine... Does not make it
correct.

Douglas
 
Douglas said:
What you are saying is absolute rubish Andre.
Just because it is written somewhere in a magazine... Does not make it
correct.
Click to expand...
When he realises that optical resolution is not even measured in "dpi"
folks might place a little more credibility in his statements.
 
Douglas MacDonald said:
What you are saying is absolute rubish Andre.
Just because it is written somewhere in a magazine... Does not make it
correct.
Click to expand...

Never mind independent tests by several magazines. Never mind the fact
that even my old Nikon LS-2000 runs circles around the 4870 in resolving
fine detail. Forget about other peoples' measurements. Lies and evil
propaganda, the lot of it!

Douglas MacDonald, High Priest of the Epson 4870 cult, sayeth the truth!
Halleluja and 4800 dpi in eternitas, amen!

Ralf
 
Yeah...
Well my Nikon LS 2000 (which is now in the rubish) could never - even on the
few occasions it worked properly, ever scan a negative with enough detail
and clarity to make a print the size I get from scans off the Epson. Prints
from 35mm, 100 ISO, 35mm film looked like it was 1600 ISO film... Total
rubish. And what's more, Nikon documented the problem, for Christ Sake!

I may not be a bloody minded Engineer, hell bent of creating historically
insignifcant bullshit but I sure as hell make a considerable part of my
living from scanning film.

Give me the experience from someone who does that instead of write mostly
useless specifications for an insignificant publications any day of the
week.

Douglas
----------------
 
Back
Top