#Epson perfection v750 m pro pro
#Epson perfection v750 m pro plus
#Epson perfection v750 m pro series

By the way, in my opinion, 3000 ppi is plenty of resolution for most film scanning as anything higher just produces more grain and huge files.SilverFast SE Plus 8, Adobe Photoshop Elements 10ДЈ5 sec/scan - film (negatives) - 35mm - 2400 dpiДЈ6 sec/scan - film (positives) - 35mm - 2400 dpiДЄpple MacOS X 10. My scanner needs to be replaced and I am considering the Epson V750-m as there is simply no other choice (short of a drum or Scitex flatbed) that will do my large films. The overall bed size is big enough for 8x10 films using the low mag. though stitching from this scanner is a simple process. Unfortunately 4x5 film is slightly wider than this and has to be scanned in 2 passes and stitched. This includes all medium format sizes including panoramic formats up to 6x17cm. I currently am using an old Umax Powerlook 3000 which has dual lenses and can scan film up to 3.4' x 11.7' at 3048 ppi. This could potentially be a major improvement as higher magnification is exactly what makes dedicated film scanners generally better than flatbeds. one low magnification than covers the complete bed and a second higher magnification for film scanning.

#Epson perfection v750 m pro series

That is that the V series has dual lenses. Which captures an RGB value for each pixel without interpolation.ДЄll of the previous converstion neglects the most important difference between the previous Epson models and the 'V' series scanners. To contact Epson America, you may write to 3131 Katella Ave, Los Alamitos, CA 90720 or call 1-80. You may withdraw your consent or view our privacy policy at any time. You are providing your consent to Epson America, Inc., doing business as Epson, so that we may send you promotional emails.

#Epson perfection v750 m pro pro

Scanner with a filterd CCD to be as good as an LED scanner with a monochrome CCD Epson Perfection V750-M Pro - Refurbished. The 4990 could do a 7+ job on MF slides and I expect the V750 to do incrementallyД«etter, but the 9000 does a 9+ job every time. However, the 9000 will scan 5 35mm slides or 12 35mm frames in one load though. Of the 9000, and supports the auto-feed magazine that is NOT available on the 9000. If your film is 35mm only, then I would also suggest the LS5000. Glass holder if you will be scanning MF film. Purchase wet scan kits for the 8000/9000 if you need scans that approach drum quality.Д«tw, the 9000 and the 8000 use the same film holders. I had the 8000ДЇor four years and its color profile never changed over that time.

Single white light source that varies in color over time and temperature. The big thing it has is a fixed, 3-color (+IR) LED light source as opposed to a However, last month I did replace my Nikon LS8000 for the 9000. I have just recently given my Epson 4990 to my wife and plan to replace it with the V750. It does cost more than the flatbeds but is far superior for those images that are challenging. I could not be more impressed or satisfied. But how many of those are you going to do? In short, the Nikon is a great tool. Maybe the drum could be pushed a bit more - say to 40-50' or more. And to my eye, the Nikon and the drum look a bit different but not one clearly superior to the other. To contact Epson America, you may write to 3131 Katella Ave, Los. I am no photo tech, but I have a decent eye. Epson Perfection V750-M Pro - Refurbished. I also have had a couple of my favorite chromes drum scanned by A&I. The image is one of my favorites and I think one of the best examples of he Nikon's ability to retain shadow detail that you can not even see unless you pull it out. To my amazement, the entire interior of the barn was revealed. But on closed inspection there was some faint detail in the panel. The top panel is virtually black because it is transparent and shows no reflection. The bottom glass panel shows a brightly lit distorted reflection of a shed behind me. For example, I have this chrome of a farmhouse window. But when you get into shots with deep shadows, the flatbeds I used, and even the fs4000 could not compare to the Nikon. I have made some nice images from brightly lit chromes with little contrast. If you have easy negs/chromes to scan, you may be perfectly satisfied with the flatbeds. I can say that the Nikon with the glass holder is a vastly superior beast in every respect. For the last year or so I have been scanning with a Nikon 9000 and printing to an Epson 2400. I have also used extensively a Canon fs4000 for 35mm. Barry, I have owned (and actually used) the Epson 4870(?) and then the 4990 for medium format and 35mm.