Epson V850 scanner

[Mark D Segal]

Neither did I but I don't think DPReview invented the information. Where else would it have come from?

[Oldfox]

The key to getting good results from Epson scanners is getting the film-holder height just right, so I am especially interested to see the improvements they've made in that area.

You are right. I have a lot of framed slides. The thickness of the frames varies a lot. If you put frames with different thickness in the same holder, it hard (or impossible) get to height of the slide itself right.

If Epson has improved the height settinngs, is it possible to use the 850 holder in 7xx series?

[artobest]

If Epson has improved the height settinngs, is it possible to use the 850 holder in 7xx series?

I have read somewhere that the new film holders are not compatible with the V7xx machines. Maybe something else Keith could investigate?

[keith_cooper]

I have read somewhere that the new film holders are not compatible with the V7xx machines. Maybe something else Keith could investigate?

Not unless someone wants to bring a 750 round to my house in Leicester I'm afraid ;-)

[AFairley]

I have read somewhere that the new film holders are not compatible with the V7xx machines. Maybe something else Keith could investigate?

Given the prevalence of non-backwards compatibility as a revenue-enhancing strategy these days, my expectations that I will be able to use the new holders on my V700 are very law.  But I don't know, just venting.

[Doug Fisher]

From the information I have read so far and heard from European customers who have already bought an V8xx, it appears to be a classic Epson minimal update with some repackaging and a once-again vague set of marketing materials that make definitive comparison difficult.

I think this upgrade is similar to the update from the 4490 to the V500 to the V600 to the V550.  Those had a updated shells and things like social media options but from what we could tell had the same basic scanning hardware except for the relatively easy to switch out from CCFL to LED in the light lid. If one is on a tight budget for scanning medium format, for the money, the refurbished V500 from the EpsonStore's clearance center is the best deal out there and produces scans just as good as the 600 and 550.

While some of the marketing materials leave open to interpretation whether the optics of the V8xx have been upgraded, I have not seen anything definitive and would be surprised if Epson went to the expense and effort to do a full optics upgrade.  Moderately priced scanner optics have not seen a big improvement for years.  If Epson did invest in a new optics system, I think that would be the headline on all their marketing materials.  I have no doubt that scans from a V8xx will probably show to be a bit sharper than a V7xx in a well controlled test but I would be willing to bet that is down to getting the film flatter and in the correct plane of focus versus better optics.  The less-diffuse LED light source may produce a bit more contrast too.  Customers of mine have been seeing the advantage of flatter film and precise height adjustment for quite some time.

I have been offering my more robustly built BetterScanning.com holders with ANR glass (real glass versus the ANR plastic used in the "upgrade" offered by Epson) and step-less height adjustment for years.  Epson got someone to reverse engineer a new set of holders to try to mimic the advantages I developed for my holders.  If, as they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I guess I should be flattered.

It is unfortunate to see they downgraded the Silverfast software from the Ai version with the top of the line V8xx but I am sure they are trying to wring out as much profit as possible as they try to extend the life of their initial investment.  These V7xx/8xx scanners are still great to have as an option for medium format and large format shooters who want to buy new but can't afford to jump up to the next class of scanners.  If Epson starts offering great prices on refurbished V7xx scanners like they have on the V500, that could be killer option.

Doug

[artobest]

As a happy betterscanning.com customer I am bound to agree with Doug, and furthermore, although the five-step height adjustment in the new Epson holders is a definite improvement over the old three-step system, my experience with the betterscanning holders tells me that for many users, it will still be too imprecise to wring the last drop of goodness from these excellent scanners.

Regarding the CCFL-->LED swap-out, I have grown extremely fond of the natural, almost print-like look of my V750 scans, compared to the harsher, grainy effect imparted by the LED in my Konica-Minolta film scanner.

[keith_cooper]

I've had some time in the last few days to go through some of my old films and slides, and it works very well.

In terms of performance, it's easily besting my Canon FS4000 with some B&W negs, bringing out highlight and shadow detail I've never seen before in some images.

The Epson scan software is very usable, and has the advantage of properly recognising the film holders which speeds up looking my "what are these and when did I take them" negatives (of which I found rather a lot of ;-)

I tried SilverFast a few years ago, and wasn't overly impressed, and I have to say that the bundled version hasn't changed my mind at all - I just don't like it from a usability point of view. The need to insert an actual physical disk when registering it was a nice blast from the past too...

As a side benefit of the inclusion of the i1 Profiler targets, I now have rather good profiles for my old Epson 1200U and UMAX PowerLook III...  Good old Vuescan (no fancy registration required).

[Joe S]

"These V7xx/8xx scanners are still great to have as an option for medium format and large format shooters who want to buy new but can't afford to jump up to the next class of scanners.  If Epson starts offering great prices on refurbished V7xx scanners like they have on the V500, that could be killer option."


Have you found the V700 to be a substantial improvement over the 4870, film holders aside?

[Doug Fisher]

>>Have you found the V700 to be a substantial improvement over the 4870<<

In terms of true resolution, if you have the film in the optimal film suspension plane for your particular scanners optics, when comparing scans you would probably find it hard to justify the price to upgrade to a V7xx.  Other things like faster scan times, ability to scan more frames in a batch, etc., might be more motivating.

Doug

[artobest]

Keith, I agree with you about the UI problems of Silverfast, but in my long experience of the V750 I have concluded that it is a necessary evil if I am to get really good scans out of the machine. I've never been able to set up the Epson software to achieve the same rich tonality that I get from Silverfast. Vuescan I haven't really bothered with - wrestling with Silverfast drained me.

[keith_cooper]

Keith, I agree with you about the UI problems of Silverfast, but in my long experience of the V750 I have concluded that it is a necessary evil if I am to get really good scans out of the machine. I've never been able to set up the Epson software to achieve the same rich tonality that I get from Silverfast. Vuescan I haven't really bothered with - wrestling with Silverfast drained me.

I bought my (perpetual) copy of Vuescan years ago for the FS4000 and found the interface very clear, but I know that this is very subjective ;-)

I've been mainly using the Epson software for the review, looking to get the most out of the scan and not worrying about tonality or curves until the TIFF was in Photoshop. The tools (and my experience) are much more extensive there, so as long as I'd got the full tonal range and detail out of the scan software, it's done its job.

I'm almost done writing up the review, but unfortunately all our web sites have gone AWOL so it maybe a day or too until I can publish the overview/review

[Mark D Segal]

Keith, I agree with you about the UI problems of Silverfast, but in my long experience of the V750 I have concluded that it is a necessary evil if I am to get really good scans out of the machine. I've never been able to set up the Epson software to achieve the same rich tonality that I get from Silverfast. Vuescan I haven't really bothered with - wrestling with Silverfast drained me.

Are you talking about SilverFast 6 pr SilverFast 8?

[artobest]

Are you talking about SilverFast 6 pr SilverFast 8?

Silverfast 6. Damned if I'm paying 149 Euros for the upgrade.

[Mark D Segal]

Silverfast 6. Damned if I'm paying 149 Euros for the upgrade.

I thought so.

No-one can tell anybody else what's worthwhile spending their money on - totally personal decision; but at the same time you may wish to review in your own mind the wisdom of passing judgment in public about products that have have been replaced with fully new versions that are totally re-designed and re-engineered from what they used to be. At the very least, if you want to pass judgment and be relevant, do it for relevant product; you can easily update your knowledge of the product and your opinion about it by downloading free trials before you spend a cent on it. Then you'll be in a better position to know whether the upgrade cost is worthwhile to you or not.

[Oldfox]

I have SF 6.5, which is not very intuitive. Is version 8 better?

[Mark D Segal]

I have SF 6.5, which is not very intuitive. Is version 8 better?

Much. Download a trial and have a look. They put a huge effort into re-engineering and re-designing the whole application.

[keith_cooper]

I might not find it overly intuitive or appealing to use, but I'd definitely suggest that people getting a V850 give it a try.  I don't find Adobe Lightroom of any use for my photography either, but can see its usefulness for many ;-)

It would be useful if the developers actually publicised the upgrade price from the bundled version, without needing you to enter serial number. Also, the process for getting a copy of the software for a machine without an optical drive seems unduly cumbersome.

[Mark D Segal]

I might not find it overly intuitive or appealing to use, but I'd definitely suggest that people getting a V850 give it a try.  I don't find Adobe Lightroom of any use for my photography either, but can see its usefulness for many ;-)

It would be useful if the developers actually publicised the upgrade price from the bundled version, without needing you to enter serial number. Also, the process for getting a copy of the software for a machine without an optical drive seems unduly cumbersome.

Hi Keith, We could have an interesting philosophic discussion about what makes for "intuitive or appealing" software, and what is the importance and metrics of these criteria in the choice of what to use, and how much of this is objective or subjective; but it would be "OT" in this thread, and perhaps more to the point, when dealing with case-specific examples it's really helpful to know in some depth the products one is talking about.

[keith_cooper]

Hi Keith, We could have an interesting philosophic discussion about what makes for "intuitive or appealing" software, and what is the importance and metrics of these criteria in the choice of what to use, and how much of this is objective or subjective; but it would be "OT" in this thread, and perhaps more to the point, when dealing with case-specific examples it's really helpful to know in some depth the products one is talking about.

Not quite sure of your drift in this instance? I've been testing software both as a photographer and my previous career in HCI research for quite some time.

I tried it with quite a few films/slides and it just didn't 'click' with me. It's the bundled software and I'm primarily looking at the scanner (which works just fine with the Epson s/w) so I'm disinclined to go into it in great detail. 

Still worth a try though... I've no personal or business interest in whether people use it or not