Good point. I hadn't read the other two auctions - it does look as if two of the three scanners are duds. The Howteks D4000 is a pretty robust scanner, but things still can go bad in it. So, as mentioned, it is riskier than buying a new Epson with a waranty. It was worth the risk to me because the owner of mine was a pro who had a reputation that I am sure he didn't want tarnished. Hell, even if it died today I still have saved money over sending the drum scans out.
Originally Posted by Peter De Smidt
I just realized that with the NIkon V we have at school, we also have an Epson flatbed... I will test both and see what I get. Maybe make some prints from it and see if I am satisfied...
I will like some more feedback though.. Anyone??
Depends on how much you want to sepnd. If you are looing for high end look a the imacon. Excellent scanners and can pull detail out of the shadows like no others. If you are in need of a FlatBed look at Microtek 1800F. The results are better than most of your dedicated film scanners and excellent up to 8x10 as well.
What you should first consider is how much time you really have to sit around the computer. Scanning is VERY tedious and time consuming and may not be the most viable solution to a fast paced business. I own a Coolscan 8000ED and when scanning a 6x7 negative/slide at 4000dpi, I'm looking at 15-20 Minutes each. But these scans are from my personal outings, and I don't have a deadline to meet. I've owned numerous scanners in the past: Minolta Dual II, III, & IV, Leafscan 45 and all of them are slow and requires very careful calibration.
Personally, if I were doing weddings, I would be shooting di*g**l. Shoot a bunch, run it through the frontier system for proofing, and hand it to the customer. When they want reprints, then I would take the time to retouch it then shoot it off to MPIX or Millers labs for reprinting.
For film, just hand it to a lab and let them deal with it.
The most important thing for any scanner is proper scanning technique.. More importantly, properly exposed negatives.. Too many times have I heard people complain about a bad scanner when it is really their negative that's horribly exposed to begin with.
Last edited by djklmnop; 04-15-2005 at 05:32 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Money is not the problem. The problem is, I don't have any.
I got an Epson 4990 yesterday and I'm very happy with it. From the reviews it looks like a nice little step up from the 4870. It's pretty fast and easy to use. The scans are a little soft but the detail is there so you just need to run a pass of USM. Haven't tried printing yet but it looks like there is more then enough to do medium size prints. Might want to get a professional scan for the occasional large print.
There was a post on photo.net comparing the D4000 to the 4990. The D4000 was a little better but not even near worth the $300 plus cost difference.
Some web samples here:
EDIT: Great photo you have attached there Andy.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Andy, you pose some important points... The fact is, I want my cake and eat it too.... I want to be able to offer Quick, inexpensive 4X6 proofs or digital proofs. I've scanned a weddings worth, one at a time, with a Coolscan, The flatbed does 24 at a time... Maybe not the best scans but I think good enough for 4X6's... I also want to be able to offer a few nice, archival quality, fiber prints from film..... Not to mention, I may use it for personal stuff for color stuff..... So, I may be in my underwear for 4 or 5 hours, scanning away....
Originally Posted by djklmnop