Medium format - studio shots

Although the images on the previous page were shot using a tripod some readers have expressed concern that I may not have used the best shot for the scanner test. I have sorted out another image, this was shot under lit studio conditions using a 5x4 camera fitted with a 6x7 roll film back. The lens was a Rodenstock 150mm set to F22. The scans were made at 3200 dpi and produced a file size of 185mb, this would produce a 30 x 24 inch print at 300dpi.

Epson V750 Pro	Nikon LS 9000 ED
Straight scan no USM	Straight scan no USM
Detail no USM	Detail no USM
Epson with USM A-150, R-1.8	Nikon with USM A-150, R-1.8
Shadow detail Epson	Better shadow detail on Nikon
Shadow detail Epson with USM	Shadow detail on Nikon with USM

Looking at the scans side by side their isn't much difference between the two scans in sharpness terms, the differences may be more down to film buckle than anything else. I will use this image again later with the fluid mount accessory (just waiting for the fluid to arrive). With most flatbed scanners applying a large dose of USM is essential, applying the same amount to the Nikon scan produces far too much noise.

The Nikon is producing noticeably more detail in the shadow areas, whereas the Epson is blocking up the blacks. Although the V750 Dmax is claimed to be 4.2, I would put a lower figure on this - perhaps 3.9.

Just in case your thinking the scan doesn't look sharp, take your wristwatch and hold it up next to the monitor and then work out how big the entire watch would look if you could fit it on the screen. (The actual watch size is approximately the size of the previews at the top of this page - using a 1280x1024 screen resolution).

Although the Epson may not produce the same quality scan result as the Nikon, we mustn't forget that the Nikon scanner is priced at £2500 and the Epson £500. For most scanning needs, professional and hobbyist, the Epson will deliver more than sufficient quality at a fraction of the cost.