![]() Here's what you're looking at between the two devices for both formats. įor the smaller formats the ability to zoom in and enlarge the film optically before it hits the camera sensor easily makes up for any losses from the filter and that allows you to beat a flatbed but it's actually hard to beat flatbeds at medium format unless you stitch shots or have a high megapixel sensor. Here are some examples of what you're missing out on. If you used a monochrome body you'd beat the EPSON flat out but you lose quite a lot of resolution and sharpness to these filters. It may sound weird that a $1500 camera doesn't beat a V550 in a direct competition but your camera body is held back by the color filter while medium format is where flatbeds start getting good. Scale the V550 scan in the first image to fit the camera shot (~75%), overlay them, apply adjustments to the V550's image to loosely match the camera scan's contrast, and you can see the Budweiser sign, the ceiling vent, and all the fine details in general are visibly sharper in the V550 scan. The V550 looks like a clear winner here to me, at least according to these comparisons. I think I added all of the necessary information, but let me know if anyone has any questions. While I wouldn't necessarily recommend the V550, I also appreciate its utility when considering cost. ![]() I'd still much rather take the camera scanning rig, especially when considering how much faster it is, but I think the Epson V550 is serviceable for web viewing at the very least. There was really no contest when comparing the results for 35mm, but I think these are at least a little closer. Being able to have that option is definitely a bonus with camera scanning though. I could have taken multiple shots with my Fuji X-T3 to get a larger image, but I don't think stitching is worth the time for the most part, especially for web viewing or printing up to at least 8x10. The Epson scan was made at 2400 dpi, while the camera scan was a single capture. Both files have had unsharp masks applied. Just like my last post, the main focus of this comparison is between resolution, which is why I didn't try to match the two in terms of edits. The film in question is a roll of HP5 that I shot and developed at 3200 using Ilfotec DD-X. I still think my closing sentiments ring true, in that the V550 would definitely be good for web viewing, but without unsharp mask, I think you'd also be very happy with prints. I rescanned the image in Silverfast at 6400 dpi and compared it against my RAW camera scan (I always run my RAW camera scans through Lightroom's "Enhance features" utility, which is why it has an -enhanced suffix). I also included a comparison of both RAW files. ![]() In the processed scans, I'm hard pressed to see much of a difference, although I do still feel the camera scan is sharper, especially in the second bottom right image that I included. I redid this scan at 3200 DPI at the suggestion of /u/TADataHoarder then scaled the image down in Photoshop to match the camera scan. This is a definite improvement over my old results and I think it highlights not the failure of the scanner, but of Epson's unsharp mask. I just digitized an old roll of 120 last night and realized I had some old scans from my Epson, so I figured I'd quickly throw together a comparison between the V550 and my camera scanning rig so people can see how they compare.ĮDIT: After reading some of the comments here, I've gone back and redone the comparison. Perform some test scans to see if the problem is resolved.Īlways switch the scanner off when you have finished using it.A few months ago I made a post where I compared three different scanning methods for 35mm using a Nikon Coolscan V ED, an Epson V550, and a camera scanning rig using a Fuji X-T3.Insert the document mat and power on the scanner with the lid closed.Clean the document table and mat in accordance with the.Before you try anything else, I would recommend that you do the following: Another possibility is dirt on the sensor or on the calibration strip (if this is internal to the scanner). However, your document table (glass) appears to be dirty and this may be the cause of your problem. It may scan a test strip internal to the scanner or it may scan the white document mat. I'm not entirely sure how it does this and the documentation doesn't give any indication. Since the pixels on the sensor do not all have the same sensitivity, the scanner should auto-calibrate every time it is powered on.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |